Dissolving Binding Theory

Rooryck, Johan; Wyngaerd, Guido Vanden

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199691326.001.0001

Cited by 78 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…12 That no dedicated binding theory is needed is argued in a range of contributions by Reuland from (1995) onwards, lastly in (Reuland 2011a). A similar claim is made in Rooryck and Vanden Wyngaerd (2011). However, their approach does not succeed in avoiding a violation of the inclusiveness condition, witness the *-annotation of feature values resulting from Agree.…”

Section: Approaches To Reflexivitymentioning

confidence: 60%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reflexivity without reflexives?

Reuland

Volkova²

2014

The Linguistic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Approaches To Reflexivitymentioning

confidence: 60%

“…The analysis of Frisian given here has been criticized by Rooryck and Vanden Wyngaerd (2011). However, this criticism ignores the difference between features being unvalued and the effects of syncretism (discussed in Reuland 2011a: Ch.…”

Section: Approaches To Reflexivitymentioning

confidence: 94%

Reflexivity without reflexives?

Reuland

Volkova²

2014

The Linguistic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If this reflexive pronoun were φ ‐deficient, the unvalued φ ‐features on the relevant verbal head would fail to receive a value and the resultant structure would be morphologically ill‐formed. It seems therefore that φ ‐deficiency is unlikely to be a universal property of reflexive pronouns as proposed by Rooryck & Vanden Wyngaerd () among others.…”

Section: Towards An Analysismentioning

confidence: 86%

“…This relation is mediated by verbal functional heads like v that do the actual binding. Kratzer therefore follows the general tendency in the binding literature to treat reflexives as not only referentially dependent on an antecedent but also φ ‐deficient (Reinhart & Reuland 1993, Reuland , Rooryck & Vanden Wyngaerd ).…”

Section: Towards An Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Minimal pronouns, logophoricity and long‐distance reflexivisation in Avar

Rudnev

2017

Studia Linguistica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses two morphologically related anaphoric pronouns in Avar (Avar-Andic, Nakh-Daghestanian) and proposes that one of them should be treated as a minimal pronoun that receives its interpretation from a k-operator situated on a phasal head whereas the other is a logophoric pronoun denoting the author of the reported event.Studia Linguistica 71(1-2) 2017, pp. 154-177.1 The romanisation I adopt here differs very slightly from that in Yamada (2013). To avoid confusion, the Roman-to-Cyrillic correspondences are as follows, where the apostrophe represents ejectivity:The romanisation above is similar to the orthography of Standard Avar in not making a distinction between the lateral affricate, and the lateral fricative, which itself can be strong and weak, all of which are standardly written as лъ, or ł in the system adopted here. Yakov Testelets (p.c.) notes, however, that these distinctions have neutralised in most dialects. Finally, such processes as glide formation are only rendered in those cases where they are reflected orthographically in the original spelling. 2 The present paper uses the following abbreviations in glosses: 1 = First person, ABL = ablative, ABS = absolutive, ACC = accusative, CAUS = causative, CM = class marker, CNJ=conjunction, COMP = complementizer, CVB = converb, DAT = dative, ERG = ergative, F = feminine, FUT = future, GEN = genitive, INESS = inessive, INF = negative, LOC = locative, LOG = logophoric, M = masculine, MSD = masdar, N = neuter, NEG = negative, NOM = nominative, OBL = oblique, PFV = perfective, PL = plural, PRS = present, PST = past, PTCP = participle, Q = question particle, SG=singular, TOP = topic.

show abstract

“…An intriguing issue is the coexistence in several Oceanic languages of reflexive markers of different origins, probably due to recent grammaticalization processes. Although this is not the focus of the present contribution, such coexistence of different reflexive markers constitutes an important source to evaluate theoretical proposals (such as Safir , or Rooryck & Vanden Wyngaerd ) that assign a key role to complementarity.…”

Section: Overview Of the Contributions And What They Tell Us About Thmentioning

confidence: 99%