Complete the following from Carnie on p. 99:

1. Binding Principles. Complete this set.

*Michael_i loves him_i.

Complete the following from Carnie on p. 99:

1. Binding Principles. Complete this set.

a) *Michael_i loves him_i. A pronominal is free in its binding domain.

b) *He_i loves Michael_i. An R-expression is always free.

c) *Michael's_i father_j loves himself_i. The antecedent of an anaphor must c-command the anaphor.

d) *Michael's_i father_i loves him_i. A pronominal is free in its binding domain.

e) *Susan_i thinks that John_j should marry herself_i. An anphor is bound in its binding domain.

f) *John thinks that Susan_i should kiss her_i. A pronominal is free in its binding domain.

2. Japanese. Complete this set.

Hint: Recall that an antecedent must c-command an anaphor.

Hint: The problem might be a definition of binding domain. The reflexive pronoun cannot be coindexed with an NP that is not part of the sentence (the uppermost S' here in C's example). Try redefining the binding domain of the reflexive so that it permits the reflexive but does not permit it to be coindexed outside of the matrix S'.

------

zibunzisino is an anaphor; it is bound in its binding domain.

It is still an anaphor. It is the binding domain that must be redefined for Japanese. The binding domain is the entire sentence with the additional restriction that it is bound to the first subject.

In English the binding domain holds to the clause level (though this is due for revision at some point, but it is not like Japanese).

zibunzisino is not c-commanded by its antecedent; it must be the other way around.

3. WH-questions

This one is a toughie. Look for one of the conditions on binding.

------

The problem is that the antecedent John does not c-command its anaphor.

A solution is not required here. In the alternate given by C., the antecedent does c-command its anaphor. The idea here is that the WH-phrase is moved, leaving a trace. I don't expect you to come up with a solution here.

4. Counterexamples

You don't have to make an alternative analysis.

In Dogrib the key morpheme here is "ye". Treat it as a pronoun and then what kind of pronoun (anaphor or pronominal).

-----

a) I have no money on me. The pronominal 'me' should be free in its binding domain which includes its antecedent 'I', but it is nevertheless bound to its antecedent.

b) The anaphor 'himself' is coindexed with its antecedent 'John', which apparently occur outside of the binding domain ofthe anaphor. (This is the hairiest problem in English parameter of the binding domain.)

c) The anaphor 'ton idhio' is like Japanese. Its binding domain is the entire sentence. (It appears to be coindexed with the first viable subject, i.e. one that it agrees with. That is, the anaphor could be masculine singular, and it must look for a masculine singular subject.)

d) If 'ye' is treated as a pronominal, then it is c-commanded by its antecedent then it must be free in its binding domain. This explains both sentences.

5. Persian

a) 'Xodesh' is an anaphor bound in the domain of the entire sentence, like Japanese. The literary 'xod' is bound in the domain of its clause much like English.

Return to 322 Course Outline

This page last updated 21 JN 04