Pan’s (2001) puzzle revisited

Pan’s (2001) puzzle revisited Hyunjun Park City University of Hong Kong tudorgepark@gmail.com Abstract The notion of logophoricity has long played a crucial role in understanding the co-referential relations between certain anaphoric expres- sions cross-linguistically, especially for long- distance anaphors violating a locality con- straint and syntactic prominence conditions within the framework of pure syntactic ac- counts. However, Pan (2001) has shown that the long-distance binding of Chinese ziji should not be treated with the logophoric ac- counts in some aspects. This paper revisits Pan’s (2001) puzzle, which arises from the ability of ziji to serve as a logophor, in order to call attention to what the alternative to this view might be, and proposes a solution to it through the notion of empathy, in Kuno and Kaburaki’s (1977) sense of the term, so that long-distance anaphors, which are not fully covered in terms of logophoricity, can be rec- onciled with other East Asian languages, such as Japanese zibun and Korean caki, in terms of a unified treatment. 1 Introduction It has been widely noted that what licenses the long- distance binding is closely related to the logophoric property of reflexives. More specifically, since Sells’ (1987) logophoric approach on Icelandic and Japa- nese, many researchers (Yoon 1989, Huang and Liu 2001, among others) have argued that the binding behaviors of long-distance anaphors, such as those in Korean and Chinese, are attributed to the logo- phoric use of reflexives and that they carry the de facto identical function. Huang and Liu (2001) point out that the three distinct roles in discourse, which are source, self, 1 Pan (1997) first proposed that the Chinese long-distance anaphor ziji can be treated as a de se anaphor, resulting in an obligatory de se construal. and pivot originally coined by Sells (1987), for the logophoric use of the Chinese long-distance ziji are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for long- distance anaphors. For this reason, they suggest that the notion of attitude de se be introduced to the long- distance anaphor ziji.1 However, despite a close link between the long- distance anaphor and logophoricity as a licensing condition for the referent it refers to, it has been re- peatedly observed that logophoric accounts of long- distance anaphors have not been fully successful, facing a variety of counterexamples. In addition, in contrast to logophoric accounts for ziji binding, Pan (2001) strongly argues that the long-distance anaphor ziji should not be treated with logophoric accounts since some properties of ziji are not com- patible with logophoricity. Pan’s view is not incor- rect. Indeed, the definition that lies at the heart of logophoricity is not satisfactory to cover every as- pect of long-distance anaphors, especially in Chi- nese, since they are used as a versatile tool. This paper revisits Pan’s (2001) puzzle, which arises from the ability of ziji to serve as a logophor, in order to call attention to what the alternative to this view might be, and proposes a solution to it through the notion of …

Content truncated to 500 words