Professor Ian Roberts

having seen the two main types of rule systems (PS- rules/X’-theory and movement/transformational rules), we now look at a different kind of syntactic relation: a dependency between elements in a structure, known as binding pronouns of various kinds are nominals that “stand for” other, more fully-specified, nominals call the more fully-specified nominal a pronoun “stands for” the antecedent of the pronoun we’ll look at reflexive and non-reflexive pronouns, starting with the former

1.Reflexives (1) a.John betrayed himself. -- John must be the antecedent of himself b.*Himself left. -- himself needs an antecedent (2)*Himself betrayed John.

HYPOTHESIS ONE: The antecedent of a reflexive must be a subject. BUT: (3) I asked John about himself. (4) *I asked himself about John.

(5)TP ru NP T’ | ru N’TVP | ru NVNP Johnbetrayedhimself(1) *HimselfbetrayedJohn(2)

(6) TP ru NP T’ | ru N’T VP | r | u NVNP PP IaskedJohn ru *Iaskedhimself P NP abouthimself aboutJohn

HYPOTHESIS TWO: The antecedent of the reflexive has to be nearer to the root of the tree than the reflexive. (7)*John’s mother talked to himself. (ungrammatical unless John’s mother is a transsexual)

(8) TP ru NP T’ ru ru NPN’T VP | | ru N’NV PP |mothertalked ru N PNP John’s to | N’ | N himself

C(onstituent)-command: a node X c-commands another node Y if and only if: (i)X does not dominate Y; (ii)Y does not dominate X; (iii)The first branching node dominating X dominates Y.

Asymmetric c-command a node X asymmetrically c-commands Y if and only if X c- commands Y and Y does not c-command X. (11) ru X Z ru Y W whenever X asymmetrically c-commands Y, Y will be dominated by X’s sister. C-command can be seen as sister-domination.

HYPOTHESIS THREE: A reflexive pronoun must be asymmetrically c- commanded by its antecedent. BUT: (13)*John said [ CP that himself left ].

(14) TP ru NP T’ | ru N’T VP | ru NV CP Johnthinks ru C TP that ru NP T’ himself ru T VP left

HYPOTHESIS FOUR: a reflexive pronoun must be asymmetrically c- commanded by an antecedent which is within the same CP (dominated by all the CP-nodes which dominate the reflexive). (16)John believes [ XP himself to be a genius ].

XP can’t be a CP, so: TP ru NPT’ John ru TVP ru VTP believes ru NP T’ himself ru T VP to ru V NP bea genius

But: (18)*John believes [ TP Mary to like himself ].

HYPOTHESIS FIVE (and last): a reflexive pronoun must be asymmetrically c- commanded by an antecedent which is within the same binding domain (BD). (20)The binding domain for a reflexive pronoun R is the smallest XP containing R and either (a) a subject (distinct from R) or (b) a finite T.

2.(Non-reflexive) Pronouns (21)a.He wrote an opera. b.Phil said he wrote an opera. -- don’t require an antecedent (unlike reflexives; cf. (1b))

(22)Johnny’s mother loves him. -- the antecedent doesn’t have to c-command the pronoun (unlike reflexives; cf. (7)) (24)John believes Mary to like him. -- the antecedent can be outside of the pronoun’s BD (unlike reflexives; cf. (18))

A pronoun can’t be too close to its antecedent: a.John hates him. b.John believes [ him to be the best ]. c.I asked John about him.

Binding: X binds Y if and only if X asymmetrically c-commands Y and X is coindexed with Y. If X is not bound, then X is free.

Two binding principles: Principle A: an anaphor must be bound in its binding domain. Principle B: a pronoun must be free in its binding domain.