Anaphor: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
from Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics |
Smallkitten1 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
''' | An '''anaphor''' is an element which depends for its reference on the reference of another element. | ||
In binding theory, '''anaphor''' is an element which must be [[A-bound]] by an [[antecedent]] within its [[binding domain]]. | In binding theory, '''anaphor''' is an element which must be [[A-bound]] by an [[antecedent]] within its [[binding domain]]. | ||
Latest revision as of 18:35, 8 January 2011
An anaphor is an element which depends for its reference on the reference of another element.
In binding theory, anaphor is an element which must be A-bound by an antecedent within its binding domain.
Examples
Himself in (a) is an anaphor with John as its antecedent. The ill-formedness of (b) and c is due to the lack of a proper antecedent: himself does not agree in person features with I in (b), and John is outside the binding domain in (c).
(a) John hates himself. (b) *I hate himself. (c) *John says that I hate himself.
Comment
Traces of NP-movement are also considered as anaphors.
Link
Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics
References
- Chomsky, Noam A. 1986. Knowledge of language: its nature, origin and use. Praeger, New York.
- Chomsky, Noam A. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht:Foris.
- Fiengo, R. and R. May. 1994. Indices and identity. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.