8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

1/21

RemarbomNon-)Cor renee:AMmmaI i stPerspecti veoftheBi ndi ngTheory*

HarumaSaMyashi ta,TerueNakato,Tsuyoshi Sawada&Masaki OhnoUni versl tyOTokyo

l . I ntr oducti on

I t i snear1yfbrtyyearSSi nce(ref trenti al ) i ndi ceswerei ntroducedi ntothesyntacti crepresentati onforthe f irst ti mei n Chomky(1965), and the way they are used hasundergone vari ous modi cati onsi n accordanCe Wth the devel opment of Generati veGrammar.Undertheearl i erversi onoftheBi ndingTheoryproposedbyChomky(1980),fbri nstanCe, i ndi ces are merel y used fbrassl gnl ngi nterpretati ons or,mOre PreCi sel y,semanti cval uestoanqphori cexpressi ons: eXpreSSionsbearl ngthesamei ndexareaSSl gnedthesamesemanti cvalue(i . e. coreference)bythei nterpreti veru1e; eXPreSSi onsbeari ngthedi f f trenti ndexareaSSi gnedthedi f fbrentsemanti cval ue(i edi O nt_ref trence)l whenthe speaker utters a sentence containi ng nomnal expressi ons bearl ngi ndi ces,hi snl eri ntenti onconcern1ngtheref trenti al rel ati oncanbecapturedbyi ndicesamOngthemInotherwords, thespeaker, si ntenti ontoexpresstherefbrenti al possi bi l i t i esastowhetherornottheydenotethesameref trenti srefl ectedontheindi ces(Or, broadl yspeaki ng,Onthesyntacti c representati on). Thi s use of theindexi sfundamental l y carr i ed over toitssucceedi ngversi onproposedbyChomky(1981), butthei ndexhascometopl ayanOtherrol ei nthi sf tamework:i tdetermnesthesyntacti cdi stri buti onofnomnal sw ththeai dofthe Bi ndi ng Condi ti onsThati s, the nomnal s are eel y assl gnedi ndi cesand thei r Thi snotebenenedI argel yfromhedi scussi onduri ngthecl ass semnar(Li ngui sti cTheoryandLanguageAcqui si t i onVI )atUni versi tyofTokyo.Wewoul dl i ketothankour 1l owstudentswhoattendedthesemnarw thusandgaveushel pfu1commentsandsuggest i onsNeedl esst osay,al l remalnlngi nadequaci esareourown.1I nthi snote,WeWl l taci t l yassumethedevi cefbrsemanti ci nterpretati onproposedbyLarson&Segal (1995). Accordi ngtothei rtermnology,thesemanti cval ueassi gnedtothepronomnalCOrreSPOndstoi tsreftrenti ntheactuaI worl dUndert hei rproposal ,mOreOVer, theassl gnmentO asemanti cvalueisi mpI ementedbychoosl ngarefbrentf romhesett hatconsi stsofi ndi vi dual si nthedi scourse(i . e. G-SequenCe). Thi s assl gnmenti s cal l ed val uati on More preci sel y, thei ndi vi dual si nthediscourseareorderedi ntheo-SequenCe,andtheindexassi gnedtoapronomnalcorrespondstotheposi ti oni nthecF-SequenCeThus, theindi vidual assi gnedtothatposi ti onw l l betherefbrentofthepronomnal Fori nstance, i f thepronomnalbearsani ndex2thentheindi vidualassignedtothesecondposi ti oni ntheo-SequenCeWl l bethereft rentoft hepronomnalAdopti ngthi si nterpreti vedevi ce,Wetakcfbr$rantedthatther rentfbranaphori cexpressi onsi sdetermnedbyvaluati on

185

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

2/21

di stri buti oni srestr i ctedbytheBi ndi ngCondi t i onsSobythi st i me, theindexhascometoPl ay two r ol esi nt he synt act i c represent at i on: i t det ermnes t he di stri buti on ofnomnalexpressi onsandexpressesthespeaker' si ntehti onaboutth i nterpretati onof i ndi ces.

AstheMni mal i stProgramsadvocatedbyChomky(1993)l andl aterdevel opedbyChomky(1995,1998, 1999), thesemanti ci nterpretati onhascometobedetermnedbytheSyntaCti crepresentati ohw thoutthemedi ati onof i ntermedi atel i ngui sti cl evel s (i . e. D-andS-StruCtureS)Thus, the Bi ndi ng Condi t i ons have come to be appl i ed solely at LF(Chomky(1993:43)), andhaveul t i matel ycometobedefi nedi ni nterpreti vetermS,Wthi ndi ces di spensed w th.G ven thei nterpreti ve versi on ofthe Bi ndi ng Condi ti ons, thei nterpretati onof theref trenti al possi bi l i tyofnomnal s,butnotthei rdi stri buti on, hascometobeinl fbcusInotherwords,theBi ndi ngCondi ti onsassl gnani nterpretati ontonomnal sWhi ch sati sfythe c-COmmandand domai n restri cti ons. Thus, under the mnimal i stassumptl On, - i ndi cespl ay norol einbi ndi ng, Si ncef reeindexing,Whi chi ntroduces newel ements duri hg the course of deri vati ons,WOul d vi ol ate thei ncl usi veness condi t i on(Chomky(1995: 228)). Now f i ndi cesareabandonedi ntheMni mal i stProgramOnemaywonderhowherol esi ndi cesplayedshoul dbecarri edovertootherdevi cesThenaquest i onari sesastowhetherornotthespeaker' si ntenti onrepresentedbyindi cescanalsobedi spensedw th, thati s,Whetherornotthespeaker' si ntenti onshoul dberepresentedi nthesyntacti crepresentati on. Thi si soneof thequesti onsthi snoteaddresses.

Wth respect to the case ofcoreference,Fi engo&May(1994)i ntroduces a newCOnCePtaboutthei ndex, namelyi ndexi cal type.Theoccurrenceofani denti cal i ndexi sdi vi dedi nto two types: -OCCurrenCeSand -OCCurrenCeS. Fi engo&May relate thi sdi f f trencei nthei ndexi cal typetOthedi f f trencei nthewayofval uat i on(i . e. assi gnmentofaSemanti c val ue to nomnal s). Val uati on of theanaPhori c expressi on beari ng a -OCCurrenCeOfacertaini ndexi sdependentonthe(grammati cal )su ectwhi chbearstheSameindex;Valuati onofthe anaphori cexpressi onbear1ngan -OCCurrenCeOacertai ni ndexi si ndependentof thesuq. ect. 2Thi sdi f fbrencei ntheval uati oncanbefurtherrel atedtothedi f f brencei nthesuqect, sawareneSS. 3I f thesubj ecti sawareOf theref trentof theanaphori cexpressi on, i tsval uati oni sdependentonthesu ect. Conversel y, i f thesu ecti snotawareO theref trentof theanaphori cexpressi on, i t i sassl gnedasemanti cval uei ndependentl yof thesuqect. Thus, thedi f fbrencei nthesuqect' sawarenessi sref l ectedi nthedi f fbrencei ntheindexi cal typeAtthi spolnt, anOtherquesti onari sesastowhetheror2 AccordingtoFi engo&May(1994), Val uati oni snotalwaysdependentonthegrammati calSubj ect, butonthenomnalsi ngeTTeralasl ongasi tmeetscert ain condi t i onsButsi ncewearedeal i ngw thawareness, Whi chi si nherenttothegrammati cal suqect,Wel i mtourattenti ontotheCaSeO}dependencyonthegrammati cal su ect.3J Thecorrelati onbetweenthe'va)uati onandthesubj ect' sawarenessseemvagueandi t i snotexpl i ci t l ystatedi nFi engo&May(]994). Neverthel ess,Wehavereachedaconsensusi nthec)assdi scussi onthattheyarei ndeedcorrel ated, andwew l l taci tl yassumethi scorrel at i on

186

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

3/21

notthe, di st i nct i oni Hthesu 6ct?sawareneSSCanal sobedi spenSedw thi nnarrOWSyntaX,thati s 1Whetherornotthe-su ect, s awareness shoul dberepresentedi nthe syntacti crepresentati oni Thi si san0therof= hequesti onsthi snOteaddresses

Theai mofthi snoteistorevi ewhechangeSi ntheBi ndi ng-Theoreti ctreatmentof thespeaker, si ntenti onandthesubi ect, sawareness, anddi scusstheprobl emrel atedtothestatusofthespeaker, si ntenti onandthesuqect, sawareneSSi ntheMni mal i stProgramInpart i cul ar, thi snotei sconcemed w ththecorrelati ohbetween thesedi st inct ions andCondi ti onB, andtri estoprovi deanswerst othequesti onsposedaboveSpeci f i cal 1y,thi snotearguesthatnei therthespeaker, si ntenti onnorthesubj ect' sawareneSSi srepresentedi nnarrowsyntax,andshowsthatcertai nl i ngui st i cphenomena,Whichhavebeenexpl ai nedw ththeuseof i ndi ces, Canbedeal tw thi ntheMni mal i stProgramWthoutrecoursetoi ndi ces. Si nceboththespeaker, si ntenti onandthesuqect' sawarenessareCl osel yrel atedtotheBi ndi ngTheory,thi snoteal soconsi derswhethertheyshoul dberefl ectedi ntheBi ndi ngTheory

2. I nterpreti vePossi bi l i ti es

Whenapronomnal appearsi nthesamesyntacti cenvi ronmentw thi tspotenti alantecedent, eSpeC al l ywhenapronomnal fb1l owsi tspotenti al anteCedent, i thasvari ousi nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esw threspectt oi tssemanti cval ue,Whi chcanbedi videdi ntotwo

mqorcl asses:Whetherornotthesbeakeri scomt tedtodeci di ngtheref trentof thepronomnal 4I f thepronomnal fol l owsanothernomnal outsi deof i tsI ocal domai n(i einthenon- l ocal domai n), fori nstance, i tcanref trtothei ndi vidual denotedbythi snomnal orsomeotheri ndi vi dual . Thati s, i tcanbeei thercoref trenti al w ththi snomnal ordi O nt omt:5

(1)a. Pi cardthi nksthathew l l wnb.Kl i ngonsthi nkthathew l l wn

4 wew l l tentati vel yfb1l owKayne(1994)i nassumngthatprecedencei sde edi ntermofthehierarchi cal noti on (asymmetri c)c-COmmand nluS X precedes YiffX asymmetr i cal l y c-commandsY( i . e. Xc- COmmandsYandYdoesnotc- COmmandsX);Xc- COmmandsYi f f ( i )thenrstbranchi ngnodedomnati ngXdomnatesY,( i i )XdoesnotdomnateY, and(i i i )Xi snotequaltoY.Note, however, thatKayne,s ongl nal versi on of LCA s nottenabl ei h the Mni mal i stPr9gram becausei t cruC al l y rel i es on non-branchi ng prqi ecti on(and the di sti ncti on betwecnteTmnal and non- termnal )I thas tobemodi dto ttheMni mal i stProgramaStheoneproposedbyChomky(1995)5 Thenoti on ofal ocal domain fbran anaphori c expressi oni sequart othatofagovernlngGategOryhereManyproposal shavebeenmadefbri tsde i t i on, butfol l owngChomky(1986),we tentati vel y assum t hat t he governl n$CategOry fbr an anaphori c expressi oni s a mnimalCompl eteFuncti onalCompl ex(CFC)thatcontai nsi t

187

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

4/21

I n(1a), hecanrefbrtoei therPi card(i . e. coref trenti al w thPi cat4)orsomei ndi vi dual otherthanPi card(i edi O nti nr rencefbmPi cafd)Concemng(1b), Si nceKl i ngonsdenotesthepl ural numberof i ndi vi dual s, thestateofaf fai rsi sal i tt l ebi tmorecompl i catedthani n(1a)I f i twerethecaseofcorefbrence, thesetdenotedby i ngonswoul dbeenti rel yidenti cal w ththeonedenotedbyhe,Whi chi si mpossi bl ei n(1b)si ncethi si si ncompati bl ew ththei ntri nsi cl exi cal meanl ngOfKl i ngonsI nthecaseofdi O ntreftrence, thesetdenotedbyKl i ngonsi stotal1ydi f fbrent mheonedenotedbyheMoreover, (1b)hasanOtheri nterpnti vepossi bi l i ty: hecanpart i al 1yrefertoKl i ngons(i . e.OVerl apreftrence)Thus, thesetdenotedbyhecanrefertoapropersubsetofthesetdenotedbyKl i ngonsThosel ogi cal i nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esi n(1b)canbeschemati zedasfbl l ows:

(2)aCoREFERENCE b.D SJO NTREFERBNCE C.OvERLAPREFE NCE g( /

Thus,Whenthespeakeruttersthesentencesi n(1a), he/ shei ntendsthecoref trenceordi O ntrehrenceofpronomnal sWhentheanteCedentnomnal denotestheplural numberofi ndi vi dual s, aSi n(l b), thespeakeronl yi ntendsthedi O ntreference(Seebel owbroverl apre nCe).

I f thepronomnal fbl l owsanOthernomnal i ni tsl ocal domai n,Ontheotherhand, i tCannOtbecoref trenti al w ththi snomnal Moreover, i thastobedi O nti nreference:

(3)a. Pi cardl oveshi mb.Kl i ngonsl ovehi m

I n(3), tWO nstanCeSOfhi mcannOtbecoref trenti alw thPi cadnorKl i ngons, Si ncebothofthe(potenti al anteCedent)nomnal sarei nthel ocal domai nofpronomnal s. I n(3a)hi mhastorefertosomei ndi vidual otherthanPi card, andi n(3b)hi mal sohastorefertosomei ndi vi dual otherthantheonedenotedbyKl i ngonsThus,WhenthespeakerutterstheSentenCeSi n(3), he/ shei ntendsthedi O ntrefbrenceofpronomnal s.

I tshoul dbenotedherethatt hetwoinstancesofhi mn(3)canrefert oPi cardoroneof i ngonsunderacertai nci rcumtance.Andthi sci rcumtanCei sf ere renceunderwhi chthespeakercanbeuncommt tedtodecidingthereferentof thepronomnalandi t i sl eftopentothehearerSupposethespeakeri snotsureabouttherefbrentsofthetwoinstancesofhimi n(3), andhe/shel eavesthemopentothehearerThenthehearermayacci denta11yconsi derhi mn(3a)toberefbrri ngtoPi cardandhi mn(3b)tobereferri ngtoKl i ngons. Thi si swhat

188

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

5/21

Rei nhart(1983)cal l sacci dental coref trence. Thus, COref trenceoroverl apref trenceof thepronomnal i sactual 1ypossi bl ei n(3), tOO al thoughthespeaker' si ntendedcorefbrencei si mpossibl e, theacci dental cQref trenceandoverl aprefbrenceunderf reerefbrenceareal l owedonthehearer, ssi de.FurthermOre,theacci dental coref trenceandoverl apreferenceunderfree ref trenceare al sopossi bl ei n(1a)and(1b)respecti vel y eventhoughthei ntendedcorefbrencei sal soal l owedi ntheformercase.6 Notethatf reereferencei stheonl ywayoverl ap referencei nterpretati on obtains(but see fbotnote8)I n other words, OVerl apreft rencei sal ways acci dental , butnoti ntendedNoteal so thatthe subcl asses of f erefbrencearethedi st i ncti onmadebythehearer, Sincethespeakerl eavestherefbrentopentOthehearerandhe/shei stheonewhodecidestheref trentofthepronomnal Thus, besi desi ntendedcoref trenceanddi 01ntre rence, f reeref trencei sthesol eopti onavai 1abl etotheSpeaker, butnoti tssubcl asses

Thusfar,Wehaveseenthattherearethreei nterpret i vepossi bi l i t i esfbrpronomnal s: ( i )( i ntended)coref trence, (i i )di O ntreft rence, and(i i i ) f feerefbrence( i ncl udi ngacci dentalcoref trence, aCci dental di O ntref trenceandoverl apref trence)Theyaredependentonthesyntacti cenvi ronmentandthespeaker, si ntenti on:Whetherapotenti al anteCedentappearsi nthel ocal domai noroutsi deof i tandwhi chi nterpretati onthesp keri ntends

Whenpronomnalsareal l owedtobecorefbrenti alw ththeprecedi ngnomnal thatresi desoutsi deof i tsl ocal domai n, thei rsemanti cval uecanbedetermnedi ntwodi st i nctways: thevaluati oni sdependentori ndependent(Cf . Larson&Segal (1995); al soseefbotnotel ) . Underthewayval uati oni sdependent, thepronomnal i svaluedbythe(grammati cal )suqectandi t i sgl Veni tssemanti cval uebythesubj ect: theval uati onof thepronomnal i sdependentonthesuqect(Seefbotnote2). Underthewayval uati oni si ndependent,Ontheother hand, the pronomnal i s val ued by contexts andi ti s gl Veni ts semanti c val uepragmati cal 1y:theval uati onofthepronomnal i si ndependentof thesubj ectConsi derthe 1l ow eXampl e:

(4)Worf l oveshi smother.

Theval uati onofhi si n(4)canbeei therdependentonWb Ori ndependentofi tWhenWorf i sawarethattheonehel ovesi shi sownmother, thesemanti cval ueofthepronomnali sgi ven by Wb When Wor f i s not aware whose mother hel oves but the speaker6 Theremaybeasubtl edi f f trenceinmeanlngbetweenintendedandacci dental coref trenceofpronomnal sEveni f i texi sts, i ti stri vi al and ourargumentdoes nothi ngeonthi sdi sti ncti onHence we w l 11eavei t asi dei n thi s not eThe onl y di ff brence betweeni ntended and accidentalcoreftrenceseemtobethatt hefbrmeri sarepresentati ononthespeaker, ssi dewhi l ethel atteri saconsequenceof thehearer, sdecisi oni nchoosl ngareftrentthati sl eft openbythespeaker

189

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

6/21

recognl ZeS thatWorf l oves hi sOWn mOther, the semanti crval ue ofpronomnal i sgl Vehpragmati cal 1y, butnotvi aWb Notewort hi l y, thespeakerh StObeal soawarethattheoneWorf l ovesi shi sownmotheri nthefbrmerCaSe,Otherwsethedi O n Or ereference,Wl lresul tThus,Whenthepronomnal i scoref trenti al w ththesu ect, i tsval uati oncanbe; ei ther- ( i )dependentonthesu ector( i i ) i ndependentof i t.

Tosumup,Wehaveseeni nthi ssecti onthatthreetypesof i nterpretati onsarepossi bl efbr pronomnal s wth respect to the speaker' si ntenti on: (i )( i ntended)coref trence, (i i )( i ntended)di O nt ref trence, and(i i i )f ree refbrence(i ncl udi ng accidental coref trence,acci dental di O ntre renceandoverl apref trence). Avai 1abi l i tyof thesei nterpretat i onshi ngesontheenvi ronmentwherethepronomnal appears( i . e. i ni tsl ocaldomai nornon- l ocaldomain)Wehaveseen,mOreOVer, thattwotypesof(i ntended)coreftrencearepossi bl eWth respect to the su ect' s awareness:When the pronomnal i s coref t rent ialw th the(grammati cal )su ect, i ts val uati on canbe ei ther(i )dependent on the su ect or(i i )i ndependentofi tInthesubsequentsecti ons,WeWl l turntothewaythesedi st i ncti onshavebeendeal tw thinthedomainof theBi ndingTheory.

3TbeRepresemati onoftheSpeaker, sI menti on

We have seeni n the previ ous secti onthat var i ousi nterpret i ve possi bi l i t i es ofPrOnOmnal s whi ch refl ect speaker' si ntenti onand su ect' sawareneSS.Si nce semant ici nterpretat i oni si mpl ementedonthebasi sof syntacti crepresentati ons(OrLFrepresentati ons),OnemayWOnderwhethersuchvari ousi nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esaredi f f trenti atedatsyntacti crepresentati onsAndwhentheyare,OnemayWOnderhowheyarerepresentedI nthi sSeCti on,WeWl l takeabri efl ookatthreeproposal smadefortherepresentati onof speaker' si ntenti on, andsummari zethei rtheoreti cal di f f brences.

j . . 0 (J 0Uti l i zi ngi ndi cesi nhi spaper OnBi ndi ng (hencefbrth,OB), Chomky(1980)proposes

asetof ru1esi nordertoaccountfbrthei nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esofpronomnal sshowni nthePreVi oussect i onUndertheOBapproach,anaphorsareCOndexedw thi tsanteCedentbyrul esofconst rual ,Whichi snotourprl maryCOnCemhere.Whatweareconcernedabouti sthei ndexi ngofnonanaPhorssuchaspronomnal s(apartf romheboundi di om) andl exi calNPsAf tert heru1esofconst rual areappl i edtoanaphorsi nthei nterpreti vecomponent,nonanaPhorssti 11remaintobeassl gnedi ndi ces. Thus, theindexi ngrul ei sappl i edtothefu11SentenCe f romoptobottomtoassl gnindicestotheremainlngNPs.

Theindexofeachnonanaphori sapal rO therefbrenti al i ndexandtheanaphori ci ndex

190

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

7/21

i nthi s>Order; Thefef trenti al i n Xi sani ntegerandl theanaphori ci ndexLi saSetOf i ntegersI f thenonanaPhori nqueSti oni sal readyassl gDedani ndexbyamovementrul eth si ndew l l bei tsrefbrenti al i ndex;Otherwse. i tw11beassl gnedsomenewref trenti al i ndexTheanaphori ci ndexi tsel fconsi stsofthereft renti al i ndexofNPsC-CO andi ngthenonanaphorlSoundertheOBapproach, thesentences, i n(1)w l l beassi gned; i ndi cesi nthefo1l owngway 7

(5)a. Pi card2thi nksthathe(, , (21)Wl l wnbmngons2thi nkthatbe(3, 12))Wl l wn

Thei ntegeri ntheanaphori ci ndexmeansthatthepronomnal i sdi O nti nr rencef romheNPwhi chbearSi tasarefbrenti al i ndex. Forexampl e, hei n(5a)andhei n(5b)aredi O ntf romPi cardandKl i ngons, reSpeCti vel y,andhence, therepresentati onsi n(5)yiel dthedi O ntref trence8hus, - thespeaker, si ntenti ontoexpress(i ntended)di O ntref trencei ssuccessfu11yrepresentedundertheOBapproach

I tremai nstoderi vethecoref trenceandf reeref trence. I nordertoaccountforthef reeref trenceundertheOBapproach, Chomky(1980)proposesopaci tyrul esappl yi ngtotheoutputsof thei ni t i al i ndexi ngrul esWhenapronomnal i sf tee(i ) i nanOpaquedomai n, i i sdel etedf romt sanaphori ci ndex,Where fbe(i )=meanS notc-COmmandedbyNP] andtheopaquedomai nsarethec- COmmandi ngdomai nofasuqectandnomnati veNPAf tertheappl i cati onof theopaci tyrul e, (5)w11havethefbl l owngrepresentati ons:

(6)r a. Pi card2thi nksthathe(3, 0)Wl l w nb-Kl i ngons2thi nkthathe(3,@Wl l wn

I n(6), nei therof thetwoinstancesofhebearStheanaPhori ci ndex,andhencebothof themaref reetorefbrtoanyi ndi vi dual . Thentheyaref teeto(part i al l y)rel brtothesubi ecttOOThespeaker, si ntenti ontoexpressf reereftrencei sal sosuccessf ul l yrepresentedundertheOBapproach, eSpeCi al l yi nthi scasethei ntendedmeani ngof( l b)(i eOVerl apref trence) i sproperl yrepresentedNotethati n(3)thetwoi nstanCeSOfhi mcannotbef ree( i ), Si ncenei therofthemsi ntheopaquedomainandthei ranaphori ci ndi cescannOtbedeleted7 wthi ntheOBf ramework,theintegerl i sreservedfbrarbi traryreftrenceHencethei ndexi ngtononanaph9rSStart S omheinteger2g The noti on ofoverl ap ref trencei s not subsumed underthatofdi oi ntref trencei n thi sapproachIti s rathersubsumedunder the not ion of f ree refbrenceFor the way how thei nterpretati onofoverl aprefbrencei srepresented, Seethedi scussi onbelowNotehowever, thati ti ssubsumedunderthenoti onofdi ?j oi ntreftrencei ntheframeworkofChomky(1993)See 33fbrthi schangeinthenoti on

191

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

8/21

UndertheOBapproach, thespeaker' si ntenti ontoexpress(i ntended)coref trenceandOVerl apreferencecanberegardedasthe pl i cati onofru1esofconstrual , buttheycanbeappl i edonl ytoanaPhors, andpronomnalsareeXempted mhei rappl i cati onThus, theCOref trenceandoverl apreferenceofpronomnal sarel ef tf orthnOti on free( i ), andtheSPeaker' si ntenti ontoexpressthemsnotrepreseptabl eInotherwords, Onl ytheacci dentaltoreferenceandoverl apreftrencearerePreSentedasfberef trencei nthi sqpproach, butnotthei ntendedcoref trenceI tshoul dbenoted,mOreOVer, thatacci dental di O ntreferencei sal sopossi bl eunderfberef trence,Whi chamountstosayl ngthatacci dental di O ntref trenci sal sorepresentedasf reerefbrenceThus, i ntendeddi O ntreferencei sdi sti ngui shedfbmaccidental di O ntreferencei nthi sapproach.j 2 0 rJ

Retai nl ngtheuseof i hdi cesbutl argel ysimpl i fyi ngthemechani smnhi sbookLecturesOnGovernmentandB ding(hencefbrth,LGB), Chomky(1981)proposesthefo1l owngBi ndi ngCondi t i ons: 9

(7)BI ND NGCoND TIONAAnanaPhori sboundi ni tsgovernlngCategOryBAprohomnal i sf reei ni tsgovernl ngCategOryCAnr- eXpreSSioni sf ree (Chomky(198l : 188))

ThechangefromheOBapproachtotheLGBapproachist akenmerel yforthetechnicalSi mpl i ncati on(al soseeLasmk(1989))Thus, theanaphori ci ndexi sabandoned, andonl ytheref trenti al i ndexi sretai nedUnderCondi ti onBi n(7), fori nstanCe, thesentencesi n(1)and(3)w11berepresentedi nthefbl l owngway:

(8)aPi card. thi nksthathe. / 2Wl l wn.bKl i ngons)thi nkthathel / 2Wl l wn

(9)aPi card)l oveshi m. /2.bKl i ngons)l ovehi m/ 2.

I n(9), tWO nstanCeSOfhimareC-COmmandedbyPi ca7dandKl i ngonsrespecti vel yi nthei rgovernlng CategOri esTherefore, they must bear ani ndex di st i nct )m Pi caTd and9 Asmenti onedi nfbotnote2, thedenni t i onofagovemngcategoryi nChomky(1981)i sSOmeWhat di ff trentf rom what we are assumnghereButfbrthe ease ofexposi ti on, We Sti I ICOnti nuetoassumethegovernl ngeategOrytObeamnimal CFC.

192

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

9/21

Kl i ngons, reSPeCti vel y;Otherwsetheywoul dbeboundi nthei rgovernl ngCategOry,andthePri nci pl eBvi ol ati onwoul dresul t. I n(8), Ontheotherhand, tWO nstanCeSOfhearec-commandedfromheoutsi deofthei rgovern1ngCategOri es; theycanbeexemptedfbmCondi ti onBi n(7)eveni f theyarebecoindexedwththeNPsc-COmmandingthemTheycanalsobearani ndexdi st i nctf romhatofPi caTdandKl i ngons, Si ncethecontraindexi ngdoesnothi ngeonCondi t i onBi n(7)

UndertheLGBapproach, thespeaker, si ntenti ontoexpresspronomnal coref trencei s

: e C ; St: acci dental coreference, aCCi dental di O nt r ef t renceand over l ap referencei s vaguelyrepresentedbycontraindexing, Si ncethi si si mpl ementedi naslngl esyntacti crepresentati onSpeci cal l y, i f pronomnalsbearani ndexdi st i nctf romhatofc-COmmandi ngNPs,theyi ndi catethe( i ntended)di qi oi ntref trenceorf teeref trence, th 1atterhavi ngapossi bi l i tyfbracci dental corefer?nCe, aC6i dental di O ntreferenceandoverl apref trenceThenrsttwoi nterpretati onsarei ndeedpossi bl ew th(1a)and(3a), andthel asttwoi nterpretati onsarePOSSi bl ew th(1b)and(3b), aSrePreSentedi n(8)and(9)

UndertheLGBf rameWOrk,OVerl refbrencesti l l remainssubsumedunderthe eerefbrence.Thus, OVerl aprefbrencei sal waysacci dental i nsomesenserundert heLGB(andOB)approach, Si ncei tobtai nsonl yunderthe eerefbrenceI f thi si nterpretati onwereconsi dered as thei ntended one, aSi n Lasni k(1989), the theory equi pped w th a si ngl eoccurrenceof thei ndexwoul dhavetomakesomesti pul ati ontoru1einthepossi bi l i tyofoverl apref trencei n(1b)andru1eouti tsi mpossi bi l i tyi n(3b)atthesameti meThus,overl apreferencetannotbeintended10

j . j .C 0 (J j Asthel i ngul Sti ctheorydevelops, therol eoftheBi ndi ngTheoryal sochangesThi si s

j ustwhattookpl ei ntheMni mal i stProgramhencefbrth,MP)Asthesi gni f i canCeOf the10 Butsee Chomky&Lasni k(1993). They propose the noti on ofseti ndi ces tohandle thepossi bi l i tyof i ntendedoverl apref trencei n(l b)andi tsi mpossi bi l i tyi n(3b)T71eSeti ndi cesconsi stof(more than two)pri mti vei ndi ces,and by thi s notat i on, the plural i t y of the ref trent can beexpressedasasetof i ndi vi dual sassi gnedtotheposi t i onsi ntheo-SequenCethatcorrespondtothet)ri mti vei ndi ces.Thus, the possi bi l i ty of the(i ntended)overl api nterpretati on of (1b)andi ti mpossi bi l i tyin(3b)canberepresentedasfbl l ows:(i )a. Kl i ngons=2. 3. . . . , nl thi nkthathe-Wl l wn

b *Kl i ngonst I , 2.3, . . . .n) lovehimTheoverl apref trencei n(i b)i sproperl yrul edoutsi ncei tvi ol atesCondi ti onBI tseemthatthenoti onofseti ndi cescancapturethepossi bi l i ty/ i mpossi bi l i tyof the(i ntended)overl aprefbrence, butWeW11notpursuethismatt erf branexposi toryreason

193

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

10/21

l i ngui sti cI evel comesLtOberestri ctedtoLF(andPF), theBi ndi ng(Condi t i ons, haveco etObeappl i edatthe-LFinterf ace,andul ti matel ytheyhavecometobe}defi nedi ni nterpreti veterrns, Thefbl l owngi s thedenni t i on of theBi ndi ngCondi ti ons(D therel evantl ocaldomai n)proposedbyChomky(' 1993):

(10)BIND NGCoNDmONAI f i sananaphor, i nterpreti tascoreft renti alw thac-COmmandi ngphrase

i nDBI f i sapronomnal , i nterpreti tasdi O ntf romeveryc-CO l mandi ng

Phrasei nDCI f i sanr-eXPreSSi on, i nterpreti tasdi O nt omeveryc-COmmandi ng

phrase.(Cbomky(1993:43))

Si ncei ntroduci ngnewel ementsi nthecourseofderi vati on(i . e. computati on)viol atesthei ncl usi venesscondi ti on(Chomky(1995:228)), theMPapproachcannotresort toi ndi cestoaccountfbrthethreetypesof i nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esfbrpronomnal svi s-a-Vi sthespeaker' si ntenti on(i eCOref trence, di O ntrefbrenceandf reeref trence). Thus, underCondi t i onBi n(10), thesentencesi n(3)w l l recei veonl yadi O nti nterpretati on. Therei snoroombr(3a)torecei veanacci dental coref trencei nterpretati onandfbr(3b)torecei veanoverl aprefbrencei nterpretati on. Thesentencesi n(l ), Ontheotherhand, CanreCei veanyki ndofi nterpretati on, Si nce Condi t i on Bi n(10)says not hi ng about the rel at i on between thePrOnOmnal andthec-COmmandingDPoutsi deoftherel evantl ocal domain.Thati s, anyi nterpretati oni sal l owed. For(1a), boththeacci dental coreferenceandaccidental di O ntref trencearepOSSi bl e. For(l b), theoverl aprefbrencei sal l owedaswel l asthe(acci dental )di O ntef trence.Note thati n the MP f rameWOrk the acci dental overl ap referencei si ncorporatedi nthedomai nofdi O ntrefbrencei nthesenseofdi st i nctreference(Chomky(1993:43)).

Thus, under the MP approach, prOnOmnal s c-COmmanded by a DP w thi ni tsl ocaldomai n bearOnl y a di goi nti nterpretati on,Whereas pronomnal s c-COmmanded by a DPOutSi de of i t sl ocal domai n al l owanyi nt er pret at i on asl ong as the c- COmmandi ng DPi sCOmpati b1 Wththeinterpretati on. Consequentl y, theintendedcoreferencedoesnotobtain

webe]i evethattheassumpti onmadebyChomky(1993)i smai ntai nedinhi ssubsequentwork(i . e. Chomky(1995))andi ntheI argel ymodi dversi onof theMni mal i stProgrami . e. Chomky(199i , 1999)). I f we adopt thelatt erf ramework, the relevantl ccal domain may be de nedderi vati ona11y, namelyi n term of (StrOng)phases.Butthi sde i t i on mayposeaproblem totheVi ewhatconsi derstheDPasarel evantl ocaldomain. See 5aswel l .

194

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

11/21

i nthi sapproach, andonl ytheacci dentalcoreft renceprevai l sMoreover, thi s aPPrOaCh, i nef fbct, hasrei ntroducedanOtherdi sti ncti o i ntended: di O ntref trenceandacci dental di O ntrefetence(underf reeref trenCe). I hthi srespeet, theMPapproachendsupretumngtotheOBapproach,aSChomky(1993)notesTheMPapproach,however, di f f trs omheOBapproachinthatundert hefbrmerapprOaChnoneof therefbrenti alpossi bi l i t i esnotedabovecannOtberepresentedi nnarrowsyptaxsi ncethi spapproachabandonstherefbrenti al i ndexenti relyI notherwords, thespeaker, si ntenti oncannotberepresentedundert heMPapproach

j . 4. d

Wehavethusf arSeenthechangeSi ntheBi ndi ng-Theoreti ct reatmentofthewaythespeaker, si ntenti ontoexpresstheref trenti al possi bi l i t i esofpronomnal si srepresentedUndertheOBapproach, (i -ntended)di O ntref trencei srepresentedbyusi ngtheanaphori ci ndex.Del eti onof thi si ndexbyopaci tyrulesmakesi tpossi bl etorepresentfbere rence;acci dental coref trence, aCCi dental di O ntreferenceandoverl apref trencecanbecapturedaswe11.Notethatopaci tyrul esdonotapplytothepronounc-COmmandedbytheNPi ni tsl ocal domain,hencefree refbrencei si mpossi bl ei n thi s case,Moreover, i ntendedcoreftrencecannotberepresentedi nthi sapproachOverl aprefbrencei ssubsumedunderf reeref trence, hencethi si nterpretati oni sal sotreatedbydel eti onof thereferenti al i ndexbyOpaC tyru1es

UndertheLGBapproach, theintendedcoref trencei srepresentedbytheuseof theref trenti al i ndexandi sconstrai nedbyCondi t i onB. The(i ntended)di O ntref trenceandthef reeref trence(i ncl udi ngaccidental corefbrence, di O ntreferenceandoverl apreference)arecapturedi nthesamesyntacti crepresentati onThus, thedist i ncti onbetweenthei ntendedandacci dental di 01ntref trencecannotbemadei nthi sapproachMoreover, i ntendedoverl aprefbrence(i fpossi bl e)cannotberepresentedadequatel ywthoutrecoursetothenoti onofseti ndi ces(Seefootnotel O).

UndertheMPapproach, di O ntreferencei sdi sti ngui shedfbmotheri nterpretati onsonl yi nthecasewherethec-COmmandingDPi si nthel ocal domai nofpronomnal sWhenthec-COmmandi ngDPi soutsi deof thel ocal domainofpronomnals, Onlythef reerefbrencei s possi bl e; thereby acci dental coref trence, aCCi dental di goi nt ref trence, and overl apref trenceareal l owed.Asi ntheOBapproach, i ntendedcoreft rencei snotrepresentabl einthi sapproachAsthef reerefbrencecomestobedetermnedbyCondi t i onB,OVerl apref trencehasbecomeasubcaseofdi O ntref trencei nthesenseofdi st i nctrefbrenceNotehowever, thatnoneof thesei nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esi sexpl i ci t l yrepresentedi nnarrOWsyntaxundertheMPapproachsi ncethenomnal i sa?Sl gnedi tssemanti cval uewthout

195

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

12/21

recoursetothei ndi ces.Thi stheoreti cal modi f i cati onof theBi ndi ng-Theoreti ctreatmenti ssurrmari zedasi n

(11)fbrthepronomnal i nthel ocal domai nandasi n(12): forthepronomnal i nthenon- l ocaldomai nbel ow12

(11)REPRESENTATJONAND NTERPRETAT10NOFPRONOMNALSI NTHELocALDoMAINSYNTACrl CREPRESENTATI ON SEMNTI CI NTERPRETATI ON

OB*Nomn Pronomnal #ntended oref trence M i ntendeddi O ntreference

*Nomnal2Pronomnal (3, 0)(#acci dental coref trence

(#acci dental di O ntreference(#0Verl apre nCe

LGB*Nomn Pronomnal #ntendedcoref trenceNomnal )Pronomnal 2

( i ntended)di O ntreferenceacci dental coref trence(acci dental )di O ntreference

OVerl apreference

MP Nomnal . . . Pronomnal

#ntendedcoreferencei ntendeddi O ntref trence(#acci dental coreference

(#acci dental di qi oi ntref trenc?(#overl apref trence

12 Theasteri sk(*) i ndi catesthatthesyntacti crepresentati oni nquesti oni sru1edoutbysomeSyntaCti c reasonThe sharp( i ndi cates thatt hei nterpretati oni n questi oni s unavai l abl e.TheSharpin the parentheses((# )i ndi cates that thei nteq)retati on cannot be represented under thefhmeworki n questi onTYl e term H ntended/acci denta]Mn the parenthesesi ndi cates that thedi sti ncti oni nthei nterpretati oni snotrepresentabl e

196

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

13/21

(12)REPRESENTATIONAND NTERPRETATIONOFPRONOMNALSI NTHENoN-LocALDoMAINSYNT CTI CREPRESENT T10N SEMANTI CI NTERPRETATI ON

0*Nomnal . . . Pronomnal (# i ntendedcoref trenceNomnal 2Pronomnak i ntendeddi O ntreference

Nomnal2Pronomnal (3,)accidental coref trence

accidental di goi ntreferenceOVerl apreference

LGBNomnal .. . Pronomnal i ntendedcoref trence

Nomnal l Pronomna12( i ntended)di O ntref trence

accidental coref trence(acci dental )di O ntref trence

OVerl apreftrence

MP Nomnal Pronomnal( i ntended)coref trence( i ntended)di O ntrefbrence(acci dental )coref trence

(acci dental )di O ntrefbrenceOVerl apref trence

UndertheOBandLGBapproaches, thei mpossi bi l i tyof i ntendedcorefbrenceinal ocaldomai ni sduetothei l l - f brmednessofsyntacti crepresentati on,Whi chi srul edoutbytheSyntaCti cprl nC pl e. I notherwords, SOmerefbrenti al possi bi l i t i esareeXC udedi nsyntaxThei mpossi bi l i ty of i nterpretat i oni s at tr i buted to thei l l - fbrmedness of the syntacti crepresentati on undert hesetwo approaches. Underthe MP approach,On theotherhand,SyntaCti c prl nC pl esarei rrel evant to thei mpossibi l i ty ofi ntended coreftr enceThei mpossi bi l i tyof thi si nterpretati oni saresul tof theappl i cati onof thei nterpreti veversi onoftheBi ndingCondi t i onsatLFUndertheMPapproach, thei ntendedcoref trencei sru1edouti ndependentl yof thewel l - formednessof thesyntacti crepresentati on.

Concern1ng thei ntended di 01ntrefbrencei n al ocal domai n,t he OB and MPapproachesdi sti ngui shi tf fomotheri nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i es.Underthefbrmerapproach, i ti srepresentedby thecombi nati onof ref trenti al and anaphori ci ndi ces. Underthel atterapproach, i t i stheonl yonepermssi bl ei nterpretati ondetermnedbythei nterpreti veversi onbfCondi ti onB. UndertheLGBapproach, thei ntendeddi 01ntref trencei srepresentedbyCOntrai ndexi ng.

However, i ntendeddi O ntrefbrencecannotbedi f f trent i atedf fomreeref trenceunderthe LGB approach, Sincethey are capturedi n the same syntacti c representat i on(i eCOntrai ndexi ng). Freeref trenceundertheOB approachi sunavai l abl ebecauseof thei l l -f brmedness of the rel evant syntact icrepresentat ion. I t i s alsounavai l abl e underthe MP

197

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

14/21

apprOaCh, Si ncethei nterpreti veversi onofCondi ti onB fbrcesthepronomal i nthelocaldomai n torecei ve adi O ntrefbrencei nterpretati on. Thus, under boththe OBandMPapproaches,SOmej O thel ogi cal 1y possi bl ei hterPretati ons are unavai1abl efora syntacti creasonorf oraBi ndi ng-Theoreti cr9aSOn, reSPeCti vel y.

Fo the correspondence between' syntacti c representat i onsandl ogi cal 1y possi bl eSemanti t i nterpretati onsofpronomnal si nthenon- l ocal domai n, thereadershoul dref trtotabl e(12)and. di scussi onabove.

Nowonemaywonderwhetherthosei nterpret i vepossi bi l i t i esdiscussedaboveshoul dbereal l y representedi n narrOW SyntaXOr LFunderthe mnimal i stapproach.Orone mayCOrtj ecturethat they shoul d be representedi f the representati on has canprOVi de anexpl anati onfbrsomesyntacti cphenomena.Wewl l getbacktothi si ssuei nS5.

4. TheRepresentat i onof theSut t, sAwareneSSLetusturnnowtoanOtherdi st i nct i oni ntroducedbyFi engo&May(1994)Wehave

Seeni n 2that when pronomnalsare COref t rent ialw th the precedi ng nomnal , thei rValuat ioni s ei ther dependent on the nomnal ori ndependent of i t.When val uati oni sdependent, thepronomnal i sval uedinaccordancew ththeval ueoftheprecedi ngnomnalFromhespeaker' spol ntO view thi sval uati oni ndi catesthatthei ndi vidual denotedbythePreCedi ngnomnal i sawareOwhothepronomnal ref trsto, thati s, thathehi mel f i sref trredtobythepronomnal .Whenval uati oni si ndependent,Ontheotherhand,thepronomnal i sVal ued by contexts andi t i s glVeni t s semant i c val ue pragmat i cal 1yIn thi s case,thei ndi vidual denotedbytheprecedi ngnomnal i snotawarethathehi mel f i sreft rredtobythepronomnal .

Fi engo&May(1994)rel atesthi sdi f f trencetothedi st i ncti oni nthei ndexi cal typeWhenthevaluati onofthepronomnal i si ndependent, i tbearsan OCCurrenCeOi ndi ces.Wheni tsval uati oni sdependent, i tbearSa -OCCurrenCeOf i ndi ces. Thus, thesentencei n(4)canberepresentedi nthefo1l owngway, dependi ngonthewaythepronomnal i s)al ued:

(13)a.Worql oveshi s mother.b.Worql oveshi s?mother.

I n(13a), hi sbearSan -OCCurrenCeOf thei ndex,andhencei tsval uati oni si ndependentofWb4Worf i snotawarethathehi mel f i srefbrredtobyhi s. I n(13b), Ontheotherhand, hi sbear a -OCCurrenCeOf thei ndex,andhencei tsval uati oni sdependentonWb Worf i sawarethatheh sel f i sref trredtobyhi s. Asi s' obvi ousfromherepresentat i onsi n(13),thedi st i ncti oni ntheval uati on, namel ythedi st i ncti oni nthesu ect' sawarenessi smadei n

198

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

15/21

thqsyntacti crepresentati on Representati onofthesuqect' sawarenessyi eldsvari ousconsequencesOneofthemi s

an expl anati on fbci nterpreti ve-possi bi l i ti es of thePrOnOmnal i nvoI vedi nVP el l i psI S Consi derthefbl l owngeXampl e:

(14)Ki rk,SaWhi mother, andSpock-di d, tOO (14)i s ambiguous: i t can recei ve a stri ct or sl oppyinterpretati onUnder the stri cti nterpretati on, (14)meanSthatKi rksawhi sownmotherandSpocksawKi rk' smothertooUnderthesl oppyi nterpretati on, (14)meanSthatKi rksawhi sownmotherandSpocksawhi sownmothertooFi engo&Mayatt ri butesthi sa bi gul tytOthedi f f trencei nthewayof al uati on, namel ythe di sti ncti oni nthetypeO i ndi cesForeaseofexposi ti on, 1etusassumethatVPel l i psI Si sadeleti onprocedurethatt akespl acei nthePFcomponent13Fol l owngFi engo&May,WeaSSumefurtherthatthei denti tybetweenanteCedentandel i dedVPsi nthesemanti cval ueofpronomnal s( f or -OCCurrenCeS)ori nthedependencyofval uati on(for -OCCurrenCeS)i srequi redfbrVPe11i psi sThus, therepresentati onof (14)befbretheappl i cati onof thedel eti onprocedurecanbei l l ustratedasfbl l ows:

(15)a.Ki rkTsawhi sTmother, andSpock SaWhi sTmother, tOOb. Ki rkTsawhi sPmother, andSpock SaWhi s mother, tOO

Asthedependencyofval uati onfbrthepronomnal beari nga -OCCurrenCeOf i ndi cescannOtbei ntersententi al buthastobei ntrasententi al (Fi engo&May(1994:54)) , theval uati onfbrhi si ntheel i dedVPof (15b)hastobedependenton OCk: i ttakesSpockasi tsantecedent,therebyyi eldi ngasloppyinterpretati onAndsi ncethedependencyofhi si ntheel i dedVPi si denti cal tothatofhi si ntheantecedentVP, VPel l i psi si spossi bl ei n(15b)Ontheotherhand, hi si ntheel i dedVPof (15a)bearSan -OCCurrenCeOf thei ndex, hencei tsval uati oni si ndependentof thei ntrasententi al suqectandi tcanbecoref trenti al w thei therR7rkorSbockButfort heVPel l i psi stobepossi bl ein(15a), hi si ntheel i dedVPmusthavethesamesemanti eval ueashi si ntheanteCedentVP,andhencei ttakesKi rkasi tsanteCedent, therebyyi el di ngastri cti nterpretati onThus, theambi gui tybetweenstri ctandsl oppyi nterpretati ons

13 Fi engo&May(1994)areneutral i ndetermni ngthestatusofVPe11i psi sSi ncetheyadvancethei rargumenti ntheGBframework, thelevel sreIevanttointerpretati onareD-andS-StruCtureSandLF. I n thi sf ramework, therepresentati onsofLFandPFdonoti nteractw theachotherTheoutcomeofPFoperati ondoesnothaveanyef f tctonsemanti ci nterpretati onSi ml arl y, theoutco eofLFopcrati ondoesnotaf fbctt hephonol ogl Calmatr i xThus, VPe11i ps SCanbeconsi deredei therasadel eti onprocedurei nthePFcomponentorasareconst ruCti onintheLFcomponent

199

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

16/21

i nVPel l i psi scanbeexpl ai nedi ntermofthedi sti ncti onbetweenthe -and -OCCurrenCeSO i ndi ces.

Tosumup, undertheproposal ofFi engo&May(1994), the(grammati cal )suqect, sawareneSSOpronomnal s, anteCedentcanbealsocapturedi nthesyntacti crepresentati onwththei ndexi cal type, namel y -and -OCCurrenCeS. Thedi sti ncti oni nthei ndexi cal typeCan aCCOunt fbrvari ous syntact i cphenomenasuchas t he ambi gui tyof thei tri ct/ sl oppyi nterpretati oni ntheVPel l i psI SCOnteXt

5. I ssues

We have seeni n 3how the speaker' si ntenti oncanbecapturedi nthe syntacti crepresentati onandhowtst reatmenthasdevel opedasthef tameworkofgenerati vetheoryhasChanged(CfOB, LGBandMP)Wehaveal soseeni n 4howthesu ect, sawarenesscanberepresentedNowi fbneacceptst heMPproposedbyChomky(1993, 1995, 1998,1999), thereari sesaprobl emastowhetherthesedi st i ncti onsarereal l ycapturedi ntheSyntaCti c representati onAsthe de ni ti on of the Bi ndi ng Condi ti ons underthe MPapproachvi rtual l ydoesnotrepresentordi sti ngui shthei nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i es(See(11)and(12)), theanswerturnsouttobenegati ve. Eveni f thedi st i ncti oni ni ntenti onandawareneSSi snotconsi deredasvi rtual -COnCePtual necessl ty,thedi st i ncti onneedstoberepresentedinnarrOWSyntaXi fsomesyntacti cphenomenacanbeadequatel yaccountedfbri ntermof therepresentati onof thedi sti ncti ons.

Asfarasthei ntenti oni sconcemed, i tappearsthati tsdi st i ncti ondoesnothavetoberepresentedattheLFi nterf aceundertheearl i erversi onoftheMPapproach(Chomky(1993, 1995)): tOthe bestofourknowedge,rePreSentati onofthe di sti ncti on pl ays norol ei naccountl ngfbranysyntacti cphenomenonothert hanrefbrenti al possi bi l i t i esAswehaveSeeni n 33,mOreOVer, thepronomnal c-COmmandedbyaDPoutsi deof i tsl ocaldomai ni sgi venonl ythef reereferencebecausethei nterpreti veversi onofCondi ti onB(Cf . (10))al l owsi t torecei veanyl nterPretati onw threspeCttOthec-COmmandingDPInsomecases, eVenthereferenti alpossibi l i t i esdonothavetoberepresented: theyarel ef topenfbrpragmati csThus, i ti s hi ghl y unl i kel y t hat t he speaker , sintent ioni s capturedin the syntacti crepresentati onattheLFi nterface, andhencei t i spossi bl etosaythatthei nterpreti veversi onO theBi ndi ngCondi t i onsi ssupported.

Concemng the awareneSS,We have seeni n 4that Fi engo&May(1994)makesdi st i ncti oni nthesyntacti crepresentati onsoastoaccountfbrvari oussyntacti cphenomenaSuChasthestri ct/ sl oppyambi gui tyl ntheVPe11i psI SCOnteXt. Recal 1,however, thatunderthemnimal i stassumptl Oni ntroduci ngnewelementsei theri nthel exi con oi duri ngthederi vat i onl eadstoavi ol at i onof thei ncl usi venesscondi ti on(See 3. 3). Therefore, ' i ndexi cal

200

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

17/21

typesaswel l asi ndexi caloccurrencescannOtbecarr i edovert othemmmal i stassumptl OnMoreover, thedi sti ncti oni nawareneSSal waysentai l s thatthepronomnal i scoref trenti alWth some nomnal , but as we have ment i oned above, the coref t renceinterpretat i on ofPrOnOmnal si n non-l ocal contexts cannOt be expl i ci tl y represented atthe LFi nterfaceHence,eVenthenoti onofthesuqect' sawarenessneednotbeavai l abl ei nnarrOWSyntaXOrattheLFinterf aceunderthemni mal i stassumptl On. r

Tomaintai ntheMPapproachandtoaccountf brthei nterpreti vepo$Sibi l i tyl ntheVPe11i psI SCOnteXtw thoutrecoursetotheindexi cal typeortheindexi cal occurrenceLetusSeeFox' s(2000)proposal . HeproposesthatVPel l i psi sobserveSthefo1l owngpri nci pl e:

(16)NPPARALLELI SMNPsi ntheantecedentandel i dedVPsmustei thera. havethesameref trenti al val ue(Ref trenti al Paral 1el i smorb. bel i nkedbyi denti cal dependenci es(Structural Paral l el i sm

(Fox(2000:117))

UnderFox' sappr?aChPemssi bl e/ unavai 1abl ei nterpretati onsof (14)canbecorrectl yexpl ainedbythepri nci pl ei n(16). Foreaseofexposi ti on, 1etusagainassumehereaswel lthatVPel l i psi si sadel et i on, PrOCedurethati sappl i edi nthePFcomponent(Seefbotnote12)Then, the relevant representati on of (14)befbre t he appl i cat i on of VP e11i psi s canbei l l ustr atedasfbl l ows:14, 15

(17)a. STRI CrI NTERPRETATIONKi r d 1KIRKmOther. Spocksawhi sK[RKmOther.tb. SLOPPYI NTERPRETAT10N

Ki SMKmOther. Sp ]SspocKmOtherr4 Foreaseofexposi ti on, erepresentthesemanti cval ueofpronomnal sw ththecapi talsubscri pti ni tal i cs. Butnotethatthi srepresentati oni snothingmorethananotati ona]devi ceandi tdoesnotbearanytheoreti cal meani ng: i t i smerelyanotati onalvari ant. Noteal sothatFox(2000)adoptsthenotati onusedi nH ggi nbotham1983)fbrtherepresentati onofdependency.Wetaci t l yassumethi snotati onaswel l .15 Al thoughFox' sapproach(2000)canadequatel yaccountfbrthei nterpreti vepossi bi l i t i esi ntheVPe11ipsISCOnteXtundermni mal i stassumpt10nS, i t i snotw thoutaprob]emei therThus, Whenthedel eti on procedure appl iesin the PFcomponent, i thas to haveaccess to thei nfbrmati on on theref trenti aI val uebfpronomnal si nordertoobserve(16), butthi si si mpossi bl esi ncePFandLFdonoti nteract each other. Our wld guess suggest s that the refbrenti al val ue ofpronomna)s has to bedetemnedpri ort oSpel l -Outsothati tcanbefbdtothePFcomponent

201

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

18/21

C.UNAVAILABLEI NTERPRET T10Nmother. J Spocksawhi ssc7TmOther.

Thepronomnal si n(17a)observetheRefbrenti al Paral l el i smn(16a), andhenceVPel l i psi si sl i ci ti nthi scontext, Whi chl eadstoastr i cti nterpretati onSi ml arl y, thepronomnal si n(17b)observe theStruCtural Paral 1el i smn(16b), andthusVPel l i psi si s al sol i ci ti nthi sCOnteXt, therebyyiel di ngasl oppyinterpretat i on. Conversel y,thepronomnal si n(17c)donotobservenei thertheReft renti al Paral l el i smnortheStruCturalParal l el i smWhi chpmakesVPel l i psi si nthi scontexti l l i ci t . (17c)i srul edoutby(16). Thus,Fox' s approachcanCOrreCtl yderi vethe ambi gui tyof thestr i ct/ sl oppyl nterPretati oni ntheVPe11i psI SCOnteXtunder the mni mal i st a sumptl On, eSPeCi al1y wthout recourse to the di sti ncti oni nthei ndexi cal type(i e - / P-OC?ur nCeSOf i ndi ces)16I f thi sapproac i sontheri ghawareness does not have any sl gmf i canCe at l east i n account l ng fbr the stri cusl oppyi nterpretati onambi gui tylntheVPel l i psI SCOnteXt, andi tdoesnothavetobecapturedi ntheSyntaCti crepresentati on.

Wehavearguedthusf art hatundert heMPqpproachthedist i ncti oni nthei ntenti oni sVi rtual l y abandonedin narrow syntaxand thatthe di sti ncti oni n awareneSS Canbeal sodispensedwthinnarrowsyntaxThi sshowsthatwecanmaintai nthei nterpreti veversi onOf theBi ndi ngCondi t i onsi n(10)i ntheMPapproach.Oneremaini ngi ssuetobeaddressedWthrespectto(10)atthi spoi ntconcernSthedef i ni t i onof therel evantl ocal domai n,DUndertheearl i erversi onoftheMPapproach(Chomky(1993, 1995)), theBi ndi ngCondi t i ons appl y to the(Si ngl e)LFrepresentati on, and D Whi ch canbe regarded as amnimalCFC cont ai ni ng the anaphori c expressi on(Seefootnote5), i s de nedatthe LFi nterface.

Underthestrongderi vati onal approachoftheMPadvocatedbyEpstei netal (1998),however, Dcannotbedef i nedatt heLFi nterfacebecausesuchrepresentati oni sunavai1abl eunderthei rproposal : theappl i cati onofthestructure-bui l di ngoperati ons(SuChasMergeandMove)createssyntacti crel ati ons(SuChasc-COmmandandsi sterhood)deri vati onal l y,anduponthi screati on, thoserel ati onsenteri ntothei nterpreti veproceduresw thoutmedi tati onof

16 Therearesubcasesoftheambigul tyi ntheVPel l i psISCOnteXtthathavetobeexp)ainedunderthe approach ofFox(2000)w thout recourse to theindexical typeOrtheindexical occurrenceAmongthemarewhatFi engo&May(1994)ca11many-PrOnOunSPuZZle,many-Cl ausespuzzl eandDahrspuzzl eI naccordancewththeMPapproach, Foxi ssuccessfuI i naccountl ngfbrthef i rstpuzzl e byintroduci ng the Rul e H ori gi na11y proposed by Heim1998)(i eOne O theeconomy/opti mal i typri nci pl esunderFox' sapproach). Theremaini ngtwopuzzl es shoul dalso'beexpl ainedwthoutrecoursetothei ndexi cal typeortheindexi caIoccurrence,Whi chw I )bethetopI COOurf uturestudy.

202

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

19/21

; 1i ngui sti cl evel s. I n:Otherwords, i nterpreti veproceduresare pl i edderi vati onal 1y(ateverypoi ntof thederi vati on), andthe_StruCture-bui l di ngprocedureprOVi desi nfbrmati ondi rectl yto- theinterfacel SyStemS:Assumng)SO Epsteinetal gOOntOarguethatthei nterpreti veversi onof the Bi ndi ng Condi ti onsRappl y.w thi nthe deri vati onal processi tsel f , andtheyproposethatthederi vat i onal appl i cati onof the8i ndi ngCondi ti onsi sconstrai nedby(18):

(18)The Pl i cati onof di ?j oi nt i nterpreti veproceduresoccuTSateVeryPO ntof thederi vati on,Whereastheappl i cati onof ``anaPhori cMnterpreti veproceduresoccurs.atanyslngl epol ntOf thederi vati on. (Epstei netal (1998:62))

I f theBi ndi ngCondi t i onsareappl i edderi vati onal1y, OnemayWOnderhowD sde nedorcomputedI tcannotbecomputedderi vati onal l y,Si nceeveryi nfbrmati oni sprovi dedtothei nterfacesystemdi rectl ybefbrei ti senti rel ycomputedThestrongderi vati onal modelmustguaranteethatt hederi vati oncanstorei nfbrmati onatl eastfbrde i ngorcomputl ngDbeforetheBi ndi ngCondi ti onsareappl i edButi t i snotatal 1cl earhowhi si sguaranteedunderthestrongderi vati onalapproach

Thi sproblemspart i al l ysoI vableundertheweakderi vati onal approachadvocatedbyChomky(1998, 1999),Wherethenoti onofmul ti pl eSpel Outi s adoptedUnderthi sapproach, thederi vat i onproceedsby(StrOng)phase(i eCPorv*P), andSpel l -Outtakespl aceatt hephasel evel Thati s, i nterpretati on/eval uati oni si mpl ementedatthephasel evel Thus,WeCanregardthephaseasD SincebothCPandv*PareCOmParabl etotheCFC nthatbothof themeal i zeal l grammati cal functi onscompati bl ewththei rheads: bothCPandv*Preal i zethesuqectandtheobj ect. Consequentl y, theBi ndi ngCondi ti onscanbeappl i cabl e to CP or v*P, andthei r i nt erpret i ve ver si oni s st i l l t enabl eundert he weakderi vati onal approachI fDPal socountsasphase,mOreOVer, i tcanbeDaswe11Thus,thenoti onofthephasewthrespecttoD scomparabl etothatofCFCThi si ndi catesthatdef i ni ngD nterm ofthe phasecomport swththei nterpreti veversi onof theBi ndi ngCondi ti ons, andthattheyaresti l l tenabl eundertheweakderi vati onalapproach

6.Concl udi ngRemarks

Wehaveseeni nthi snotehowthedi st i ncti onsi nthespeaker' si ntenti ontoexpresscoref trence/di O ntreference/ f reeref trenceandi nthe(grammati cal )suqect' sawarenessofthe reft rent of anaphori c expressi onsi s capturedi n the syntacti c representati on

7 I nChomky(1999), V*i sdi sti ngui shedf rom v:V*i s-COmPletei naconstruCti on wthfu1largumentstruCtureWhi I evi snot

203

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

20/21

Speci f i cal 1y,Wehaveshownthatthei ntenti onandawareneSSCanberepresentedi ntermofi ndexical occurrencesandi ndexical typeS, reSPeCti vel y:D spens1ngWththedi st i ncti onsi nthei ntenti on and awareness, the MP approach(Chomky(1993, 1995, 1998, 1999))haspresentedani nterpreti veversi onof theBi ndi ngCondi t i ons. Thi srevi si oni sprl mafaci ePrOblemati ctoexpl ai ningcertai nsynt?Cti cphenomena,butwehavedemonst ratedthattheyCanbeexpl ainedwthoutrecoursetotheindexi caloccurrencesandi ndexi cal types

Re rences

Chomky,Noam1965)AspectsqftheTheo17qfSyntax,MTPress, Cambri dgeMassChomky,Noam1980) OnBi ndi ng, ' ' Li ngui sti cI nqui ryl l , 1-46.Chomky,Noam1981)LecturesonGovernmentandBi nding,Fori s, DordrechtChomky,Nbam1986) owedi eqf ' Language: J ture,Ori i i nandU e, Praeger, NewYork.Chomky,Noam1993) A Mni mal i st ProgrambrLi ngui sti cTheory, neewh)m

Bui l di ng20;Essaysi nLi ngui st i csi nHonorqfSyl vai nBI Vmberger, edbyKennethHale&Samuel J ayKeyser, 1-52,MTPress, Cambri dgeMass.

Chomky,Noam1995)772eMnimal i stPTVgTtZmMTPress, Cambri dgeMassChomky,Noam1998)``Mni mal i st I nqui ri es:TheFramework: ' MTOccasi onalPqpeTTin

Li ngui st i cs15,MT,Carhbri dgeMass.Chomky,Noam1999) Deri vati onbyPhase, MTOccasi onal PqpeTTi nLi ngui st i cs18,

MT,Cambri dgeMass.Chomky,Noam&Howard Lasni k(1993) TheTheory ofPri nci pl esand ParameterS, ' '

Syntax:AnI ntemati onal LtandbookqfConte OTtl TyResearch, edbyJoachi macobs,Arnimvon StechowWol fgang Sternef tl d&TheoVennemann, 506-569,Wal terdeGruyter, Berl i n.

Epstei n, Samuel Davi d, Eri chMGroat, Ruri koKawashi ma&H satsugi Ki tahara(1998)ADeri vat i ona14pproachto ntacti cRel ati ons, OxfordUni versi tyPress, Oxfbrd

Fi engo,Robert&RobertMay(1994)I ndi cesanduenti ty,MTPress, Ca bri dgeMassFox,Danny(2000)EconomyandSemanti cI nteTPretati on,MTPress, Cambri dgeMassHei mI rene(1998)``AnaphoraandSemanti cI nterpretat i on:ARei nterpretati onofRei nhart' s

Approach,MMTWbT*i ngPqpersi nLl i ngui st i cs25:771eb2teTPreti veT ct, edbyU iSauerl and&Ori nPercus, 205-246,MT,Ca bri dgeMass.

H ggi nbothamJ ames(1983) Logi cal FormBi ndi ngandNomnal s, Li ngui st i cI nqui Ty14,395-420.

Kayne,Ri chardS.(1994)771eAnti symmetryqfSyntax,MTPress, Cambri dgeMass

204

8/12/2019 lr017012.pdf

21/21

Larson, Ri chard&Gabri el Segal (1995) owedge qf -Meani ng,MTPress, Cambri dgeMass.

Lasni k,Howard(1989)Ei saysonAnqphotu, Rei del ,Dordrecht.Rei nhart, Tanya(1983)AnLPhoTtZandSemanti ch2teTPretati on, CroomHeimLondon