Dependency of Long-Distance Reflexives

Dependency of Long-Distance Reflexives Hyeran Lee Institute of Continuing Education Kyung Hee University, Suwon #1 Seocheon-ri, Giheung-up, Yongin-si, Kyunggido, South Korea 449-701 ghyeran@hotmail.com Abstract This paper aims to account for dependency of long-distance anaphors within the derivational approach. Dependency between the antecedent and the anaphor is determined by the universal operations, Merge, Move and Agree. Following Hornstein (2001) and Zwart (2002), anaphors in Korean, Chinese, and Japanese are argued to merge with antecedents to obtain anaphoricity. How such a merged complex participates in derivation is demonstrated using both local and long-distance binding examples. Logophoricity and discourse effects are obtained after computation within CHL when the antecedent and the anaphor are not merged at the outset. 1� Introduction The locally bound reflexives have been explained by the traditional binding theory in Chomsky (1981), R&R's predicate based theory (MR 1993), and the recent derivational theory (Hornstein 2001). Questions are raised with regard to the reflexive forms that seem to be bound across the clause boundary. Long-distance reflexives are found in many languages such as Chinese, Japanese, Korean and others. They are even found in English as seen below. (1) Zhangsan; zhidao [Lisi; renwei [Wangwuk zui xihuan Zhangsan know Lisi think Wangwu most like self 'Zhangsan; knows that Lisi; thinks that Wangwuk likes self; k' (Pollard and Xue 2001: 326) (2) Takasii-ga� [Kenjirga zibunvro suisenshita-to]� omotta (Motomura 2001: 319) Takasi-NOM Kenji-NOM self-ACC recommended-COMP thought `Takasi thought that Kenji recommended self' (3) Sumii-ka [Sujirka [Youngheek-ka cakiiliwlul Sumi-NOM Suji-NOM Younghee-NOM self-ACC silehan-ta-ko] sayngkakhan-ta-ko alkoi-ss-ta hate-DEC-COMP think-DEC-COMP know-PAST-DEC Sumii knows that Sujii thinks that Youngheek hates selfvyk' (4) Johni said that a picture of himself; is on sale For the constructions like (1), (2) and (3), some argued that they are actually pronouns, and some argued that they are reflexives that can be accounted for by the parameterization of the binding theory (Manzini and Wexler 1987). The sentence (4) is rather surprising, since the English reflexive himself is the most typical reflexive that is locally bound, but it turns out to be bound across the clause boundary. For (4), Chomsky (1981; 1986) introduced the concept of the governing category, incorporating the phenomena into the local binding. In the movement theory (Chomsky (1986), Battistella (1989), Sung (1990), Cole et al. (1990), and Cole and Wang (1996)), it was claimed that the apparent long-distance binding between the reflexive and the antecedent is actually local with the covert movement of the reflexive across the clause boundary. All these approaches are seeking for syntactic accounts. On the other hand, it has been claimed that logophoricity plays as a licensing condition for 431 long-distance reflexives (Kuno (1987), Sells (1987), and Zribi-Herts (1989)). The term `logophoric pronoun' was originally used for the analysis of African languages. The concept of logophoricity used for the long-distance reflexives is different from the original concept, including SOURCE, SELF, and PIVOT. In (1-3), both the matrix subjects and the embedded subjects seem to satisfy the logophoric conditions, being aware of the situation predicated. The high frequency in …

Content truncated to 500 words