The first is to substitute canonical binding theory cbt with a derivational theory of anaphora, based on how chain formation and lexical properties of anaphors interact. Third, numerous researchers have pointed out that it would be nice if the classes that nps fall into, and the conditions they are subject to, could be derived rather than stipulated. While recognizing a fundamental distinction between syntactic use of reflexives and nonsyntactic use of reflexives, we propose that this distinction is not necessarily one of lexical ambiguity, contrary to what has been commonly assumed e. A transitive predicate is reflexive iff one argument bears two. He explains the conditions on these dependencies in terms of elementary properties of the computational system of natural language. The anaphors that resist binding by a coargument can occur on reflexive predicates, but only if that reflexivity is. Cbt the theory of argumentbinding is concerned with such interpretive.
In this monograph, eric reuland presents a theory of how these anaphoric dependencies are represented in natural language in a way that does justice to the the variation one finds across languages. Heres an overview of the history of binding theory, up to the early 90s harbert, wayne. But it has trouble with examples like 10, with the tree in 11. Natural language embodies a systematic mapping between form and interpretation. Binding theory the blackwell companion to syntax wiley. That is, in english, an anaphor must be ccommanded and. Reuland 2011 presents a theory that explains why local binding of 3rdperson pronouns is crosslinguistically rare, but is not ruled out entirely. The program committee has selected 12 papers for presentation.
As we saw, if the binding theory applies at the ci interface, this raises questions about locality. The blackwell companion to syntax syntax theoretical. Longdistance binding and revisions of the binding theory 3 reinhart and reuland 1993 reflexivity. The following extensions were proposed to handle the special issues raised by anaphors in nps. Anaphora and language design presents a novel approach to the theory of binding and anaphoric relations that govern pronounspronominals such as her, and anaphors such as herself. The goal of binding theory is to identify the syntactic relationship that can or must hold between a given pronoun or noun and its antecedent or postcedent, e. This article looks at the division of labour between syntax and the interpretive systems by focusing on patterns of anaphoric dependencies. Logophoricity is a phenomenon of binding relation that may employ a morphologically different set of anaphoric forms, in the context where the referent is an entity whose speech, thoughts, or feelings are being reported. It addresses the very diverse ways in which reflexivity is expressed and shows how to find the unity in this diversity.
Background this volume is one of three which emerged from the conference on knowledge and language, held from may 21may 25, 1989, at the occasion of the 37 5th anniversary of the university of groningen. Pdf an overview of binding principles eric reuland. Furthermore, i will argue that at least one principle of binding derives from a type 1 invariant. Domains, orientation, and a typology of pronouns and lectur e 3. Lisbon binding workshop workshop on binding theory and. The canonical binding theory of chomsky 1981 chomsky 1986b predicates and reflexivity.
A pronoun a bindee usually has an antecedent a binder in context. The extended binding theory of anaphors dongwhee yang o. F 121 description this course will survey major developments in generative syntax and seman tics through the lens of binding phenomena in english and across languages. We introduce terminology like pronoun, rexpression, anaphor, coindexed, ccommands, and binds.
Some empirical problems coreference versus bound variable anaphora. This entity may or may not be distant from the discourse, but the referent must reside in a clause external to the one in which the logophor resides. Introduction names, descriptions, and demonstratives raise wellknown logical, ontological. I will adopt the definition of binding in 1 reinhart 2000.
Like reinhart and reuland 1993 i use the term seanaphor for simplex anaphors. Primitives of binding linguistic inquiry mit press. Condition b of the cbt requires pronominals to be free in their local domain chomsky 1981, which would rule out a reading with the subject as the antecedent of the pronoun. These dependencies are subject to conditions that prima facie show substantial crosslinguistic variation. While standard binding and reuland and reinharts 1993 binding theory need to stipulate these principles as primitives of the theory, most consequences of these principles now follow directly from the proposed definitions of monadic and dyadic predication, which are needed independently. Preface the workshop on binding theory and invariants in anaphoric relations took place in lisbon, at the faculty of sciences of the university of lisbon, in 22 august, 2005.
An overview, in longdistance anaphora, jan koster and eric reuland, eds. Forms can be realized in an external physical medium, interpretations are ultimately changes in the state of certain internal subsystems of the human mind. Instead, we posit just one type of referentially dependent element reflexives which avail themselves of two options for being. Yet, about half a century later, binding had become one of the central. Introduction chomsky 1981 proposed l as the binding theory for anaphors and pronominais. Eric reuland question is, then, whether it is possible in principle to develop an approach to binding that is compatible with the inclusiveness condition and. The second goal is to offer a truly minimalist derivational theory of anaphora. Terms and concepts eric reuland 1 introduction 2 binding 3 the canonical binding theory of chomsky 1981 4 chomsky 1986b 5predicates and re. Anna volkova and eric reuland poses a challenge for other theories, such as reflexivity theory reinhart and reuland 1993, reuland 2011a.
Greek anaphora in crosslinguistic perspective paul kiparsky. It takes as a starting point the fact that natural languages avoid expressions of the typesubject verb pronominalwhere the subject binds the object and cases of coargument. Binding theory is the branch of linguistic theo ry that explains the behavior of sentenceinternal anaphora, which is labelled bound anaphora. One of the goals of the current project is to investigate the unity underlying this diversity, by teasing apart the different factors involved in expressing interpretive dependencies.
Introduction natural language embodies a systematic mapping between form and interpretation. Reinhart, tanya, and eric reuland 1993, reflexivity. Collection of papers on the definiteness effect in a variety of constructions and languages, though with special attention to existentials. Much of current research in binding is based on the canonical binding theory. Reinhart and reuland propose to replace chomskys binding principles a and b. Getting both praise and constructive criticism on my work from such outstanding worldclass scientists has truly.
In linguistics, binding is the distribution of anaphoric elements pronouns and other proforms. At earlier stages of the theory of government and binding chomsky 1981, the binding theory was also believed to govern certain aspects of the. This article explains the conditions on the binding of pronouns, sim. Pronouns may not have a local ccommanding antecedent. Still, a good theory on binding should provide an explanation for why so many languages show condition b effects. Binding a binds b iff i a ccommands b, and ii a and b are coindexed. Binding domain version 1 of 4 the binding domain of an anaphor. Unlike 17a, where zich is excluded, the apparently identical structures in 19ab allow or even require it. Everaert 1986, 1991 has noted a contrast that constitutes a real challenge to the standard binding theory. And heres a somewhat different approach to binding theory reinhart, tanya, and eric reuland. Knowledge and language volume i from orwells problem to. This article analyzes the factors determining the use of dedicated reflexives in natural language. Locality conditions on binding are shown to follow from this economy principle and independent principles of minimalist syntax, providing the means to encode certain dependencies, most economically, within the computational system. Pdf anaphora and language design presents a novel approach to the theory of binding and anaphoric relations that govern.
Deconstructing binding the handbook of contemporary. Edited by martin everaert, marijnana marelj, eric reuland, and tali siloni. Revolution, discovery, and an elementary principle of. Anna volkova and eric reuland reflexivity without reflexives. An integrated computational approach to binding theory roberto bonato to cite this version. An integrated computational approach to binding theory. Reviewed by eric reuland, utrecht institute of linguistics ots1. Classical binding theory see chomsky 1981, chomsky 1986 does not make distinctions between anaphors in nps and anaphors elsewhere. Predicts that the binding conditions govern only anaphors and pronouns in argument positions. An overview of binding principles eric reuland oct. At earlier stages of the theory of government and binding chomsky 1981, the binding theory was also believed to govern certain aspects of the restrictions on movement, most notably those on npmovement. Introduction binding the canonical binding theory of chomsky 1981 chomsky 1986b predicates and reflexivity reflexivity and licensers types of anap.
Studying the relation between knowledge and language, one may distinguish two different. A property that holds of computations in general if so, this leads to many further questions. Proceedings of the 12th international conference on. Reuland 2011, 2017, which cannot be captured by the binding theory of chomsky 1981. By eliminating the notion of an index, the minimalist programme enforces a strict distinction between how syntactic, semantic, and discourse factors contribute to anaphoric relations. Knowledge and language volume ii lexical and conceptual.
1539 1505 1440 422 738 375 1205 895 416 416 1332 59 912 259 1601 1525 270 825 158 255 488 270 1491 1164 1089 332 915 23 60 8 125