Skip to main content
Log in

Reflexives and ellipsis

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper concerns the question whether reflexives can have strict readings in VP-ellipsis. It is argued that the possibility for strict interpretation is determined by a syntactic factor: subordination of the elided clause relative to the antecedent clause facilitates strict interpretation, whereas coordination disfavors it. This contrast is shown to be predictable by theories of syntactic reconstruction which assume that a surface reflexive corresponds to a bound variable at the point of ellipsis reconstruction, and where the binder has scope over a subordinated ellipsis but not over a coordinated ellipsis. One possibility is that the binder is the reflexive itself, moved at LF. A further factor, namely the possibility of speakers reinterpreting the ellipsis as a deep anaphor, accounts for why strict readings are in fact weakly acceptable in coordinated ellipsis. Previous accounts of ellipsis and reflexives are evaluated in light of the new data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bouchard, Denise: 1984,On the Content of Empty Categories, Foris, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chao, Wynn: 1987,On Ellipsis, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, published 1993 by Garland Publishing.

  • Chierchia, Gennaro and Sally McConnell-Ginet: 1990,Meaning and Grammar, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam: 1986,Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use, Praeger, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, Noam: 1993, ‘A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory’, in K. Hale and S. Keyser (eds.),The View from Building 20, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple, Mary: 1991, ‘Against Syntactic Reconstruction’, Xerox technical report, Xerox-PARC, Palo Alto, Cal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple, Mary, Fernando Pereira, and Stuart Shieber: 1991, ‘Ellipis and Higher-Order Unification’,Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 399–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Gareth: 1980, ‘Pronouns’,Linguistic Inquiry 11, 337–362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiengo, Robert: 1977, ‘On Trace Theory’,Linguistic Inquiry 8, 35–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiengo, Robert and Robert May: 1994,Indices and Identity, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grodzinsky, Yusef and Tanya Reinhart: 1993, ‘The Innateness of Binding and Coreference’,Linguistic Inquiry 24, 69–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haïk, Isabelle: 1987, ‘Bound VPs That Need to Be’,Linguistics and Philosophy 10, 505–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamkamer, Jorge and Ivan Sag: 1976, ‘Deep and Surface Anaphora’,Linguistic Inquiry 7, 391–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene: 1993, ‘Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation: A Reinterpretation of Reinhart's Approach’, SfS-Report 07-93, Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft, University of Tübingen.

  • Hestvik, Arild: 1991, ‘Subjectless Binding Domains’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 455–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hestvik, Arild: 1992, ‘Strict Reflexives and the Subordination Effect’, in S. Berman and A. Hestvik (eds.),Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereich 340, Bericht Nr. 29 (1992). Distributed by IBM Germany, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kamp, Hans and Uwe Reyle: 1993,From Discourse to Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katada, Fusa: 1991, ‘The LF Representation of Anaphors’,Linguistic Inquiry 22, 287–314.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitagawa, Yoshihisa: 1991, ‘Copying Identity’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 9, 497–536.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, Angelika: 1991, ‘The Representation of Focus’, in A. v. Stechow and D. Wunderlich (eds.),Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebeaux, David: 1983, ‘A Distributional Difference between Reciprocals and Reflexives’,Linguistic Inquiry 14, 723–730.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebeaux, David: 1985, ‘Locality and Anaphoric Binding’,The Linguistic Review 4, 343–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobeck, Ann: 1987,Syntactic Constraints on VP Ellipsis, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Washington. Distributed by IULC, Bloomington, Indiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lobeck, Ann: 1992, ‘Licensing and Identification of Ellipted Categories in English’, in S. Berman and A. Hestvik (eds.),Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforchungsbereich 340, Bericht Nr. 29 (1992). Distributed by IBM Germany, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • May, Robert: 1985,Logical Form, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara and Emmon Bach: 1984, ‘Quantification, Pronouns, and VP Anaphora’, in J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds.),Truth, Interpretation and Information, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 99–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pica, Pierre: 1987, ‘On the Nature of the Reflexivization Cycle’, in J. McDonough and B. Plunkett (eds.),Proceedings of NELS 17, GLSA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pp. 483–499.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya: 1983, ‘Coreference and Bound Anaphora: A Restatement of the Anaphora Questions’,Linguistics and Philosophy 6, 47–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya: 1991, ‘Non-Quantificational LF’, in A. Kasher (ed.),The Chomskyan Turn, Blackwell, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinhart, Tanya and Eric Reuland: 1993, ‘Reflexivity’,Linguistic Inquiry 24, 657–720.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi, Luigi: 1990,Relativized Minimality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooth, Mats: 1985,Association with Focus, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sag, Ivan: 1976,Deletion and Logical Form, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT. Distributed by IULC, Bloomington, Indiana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Edwin: 1977, ‘Discourse and Logical Form’,Linguistic Inquiry 8, 101–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zagaona, Karen: 1988,Verb Phrase Syntax, Kluwer, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This paper, a longer version of which was distributed as Hestvik (1992), has benefited from presentations at the universities of Cologne, Oslo, Florida International University, UQAM, Tübingen, Stuttgart, SOAS and Oxford, and at the 1993 LSA meeting in Los Angeles. Thanks to Nick Asher, Steve Berman, Bob Fiengo, Hans Kamp, Robert May, Mats Rooth, Helle Sem, Arnim von Stechow, and the editors of this journal for useful commentary and discussion. This work was supported by grant SFB 340 (A5) from the German Science Foundation to the University of Stuttgart.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hestvik, A. Reflexives and ellipsis. Nat Lang Seman 3, 211–237 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01249838

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01249838

Keywords

Navigation