West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) (38th : 2020)

Demystifying Picture Noun Anaphora Bryant, Shannon; Charnavel, Isabelle 2020

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
73804-Bryant_S_et_al_Demystifying_WCCFL38_2020_poster.pdf [ 120.53kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 73804-1.0389841.json
JSON-LD: 73804-1.0389841-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 73804-1.0389841-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 73804-1.0389841-rdf.json
Turtle: 73804-1.0389841-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 73804-1.0389841-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 73804-1.0389841-source.json
Full Text
73804-1.0389841-fulltext.txt
Citation
73804-1.0389841.ris

Full Text

I.  Contexts with obligatory nominal subject projection** Creator vs. logophoric interpretation = probe into subject projection in NP ** ✔ Subject binding, i.e. creator interpretation, obligatory*[XP DP X ... prolog ... [NP prosubj N  herself ]][XP DP X ... prolog ... [NP prosubj N herself ]]• Reflexive goal arguments:(10)  a.  Ellis enjoyed the letter to himself.  [context: letter written by {a. Ellis; *b. Ellis’s sister}] b. John stole Mary’s letter to herself.  [context: letter written by {a. Mary; *b. Mary’s brother}] • Reflexive arguments within the complement of a creation verb:(see also Asudeh & Keller 2001, i.a.)(11)  Gordon {a. *wrote / b. enjoyed} Faye’s book about herself.  [context: book not written by Faye]✔ Binding across disjoint possessors impossible* [DP DPposs [NP prosubj N  herself ]](12) *Roger tore up Cora’s note to himself.  [context: note written by Roger](13) *David wrote Erica’s book about himself.II.  Contexts without obligatory nominal subject projection✔ Non-subject binding, i.e. non-creator interpretation, possible:(see also Asudeh & Keller 2001, Runner & Kaiser 2005, i.a.)[XP DP X ... prolog ... [NP N  herself ]](14) a. Erica hated the photo of herself.b.  Ben didn’t like Amanda’s portrait of himself.  [context: portrait not painted by Ben]1 (10)-(14): Judgements from 108 native English speakers via Amazon MTurk (Bryant & Charnavel, to appear) 5. Binding and subject projection in Picture Noun Phrases1Ø Extending the VP generalization: Picture Noun Anaphora can be logophorically bound only in the absence of a coargumental subject+ The subject of a picture noun is interpreted as creator (Chomsky 1986, i.a.). + English DPs may project only one external argument (Longobardi 2001, i.a.).3. Logophoric A-binding in Picture Noun Phrases✔ Covert binding licensed when logophorically interpreted (Charnavel 2020, to appear)• Anteceded by a mental perspective center (attitude holder, empathy locus)• In a phrase expressing the antecedent’s first person perspective(5)  a.  John knew [that prolog there was a picture of himself in the post office]. b. *Mary said about John [that prolog there was a picture of himself in the post office].  ✔ Exhaustive coreference constraint on locally co-occurring logophoric anaphors (Charnavel 2020, to appear)(6)  John told Mary …a.  [that prolog there was a story about himself in the paper]. b.  [that prolog there were some pictures of themselves in the paper].c. *[that prolog /prolog there were a story about himself and some pictures of themselves in the paper].Demystifying Picture Noun AnaphoraShannon Bryant and Isabelle CharnavelHarvard UniversityWCCFL 38 – University of British Columbia1. The problem with Picture Noun AnaphoraØ GB Condition A: Anaphors must be bound within the minimal XP containing them and a subject (Chomsky 1986)+ Picture Nouns may project covert agentive subjects.✔ Non-complementarity with pronouns (Chomsky 1986)(1)   a. They heard stories about themselves.b. They heard [PRO stories about them]. ❌ No need for overt local binder even when non-agentive(2)   Tom believes that there is a picture of himself hanging in the post office. (Jackendoff 1972)Ø Predicate-based Condition A: Anaphoric arguments of a predicate with a subject must be bound by a coargument (Pollard & Sag 1992, Reinhart & Reuland 1993)+ Anaphors lacking a coargument are exempt from Condition A and licensed by discourse factors like point of view.✔ Sensitivity to perspective(3) *Mary said about John that there was a picture of himself in the post office. (Kuno 1987)❌ No need for coargument even when non-perspectival (Charnavel & Sportiche 2016)(4)   a. The witty play contains a parody of itself.b. *The witty play convinced Bob to see a parody of itself.2. Solution: Condition A + Strong/Weak Competition Ø Condition A: An anaphor must be bound within the minimal Spell-out domain (Charnavel & Sportiche 2016) • No exemption, but anaphors can be locally bound by a covert logophoric pronoun prolog under appropriate perspectival conditions (Charnavel 2020, to appear).… (DP) … [Spell-out domain ... prolog ... herself ... ]Ø Competition: All else being equal, a weaker form excludes a stronger form (Cardinaletti & Starke 1999)• Proposal: English weak pro-forms (‘erself, ‘er) block strong pro-forms (herself, her).cf. French clitics se/la/lui block strong reflexive elle-même and strong pronoun elle (Charnavel & Sportiche 2016)• Prediction: Logophoric herself can only occur in positions that cannot host weak pro-forms in broad focus contexts.cf. French logophoric elle-même can only occur in non-cliticizablepositions (Charnavel 2020)4. Strong/Weak competition: generalization in English VPØ Weak ’erself vs. strong herself (Ahn 2015)• Anaphors bound by a deep and surface coargument subject are extrametrical in broad focus contexts (weak). • Weak anaphors must be bound by a coargument subject. (7)  a. Remy accidentally burned {a. Maríe / b. #hímself}. b. Remy accidentally búrned {a. #Marie / b. ‘imself}. (8)  a. Louis plays a character líke {a. #his brother / b. #’imself}.b. Louis plays a character like {a.  his bróther / b.  hímself}. Ø Logophoric herself: Anaphors can be logophorically bound only if they are strong, i.e., only if they lack a coargument subject (Charnavel 2020)(9)  a. *It angered him that she tried PRO to attract ’imself.b.  It angered him that she tried PRO to attract a man like himself.(Reinhart & Reuland 1993)6. REFERENCES Ahn 2015. Giving reflexivity a voice: Twin reflexives in English (Doctoral diss. UCLA).   Asudeh & Keller 2001. Experimental evidence for predication-based binding theory. Proc. CLS 37.   Bryant & Charnavel to appear. Effects of creator role on binding into Picture Noun Phrases. Proc. CLS55. Cardinaletti & Starke 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.   Charnavel to appear. Logophoricity and Locality: A view from French anaphors. LI.   Charnavel 2020. Locality and Logophoricity: A theory of Exempt Anaphora. Oxford: Oxford UP.   Charnavel & Sportiche 2016. Anaphor binding: What French inanimate anaphors show. LI 47(1). 35-87.   Chomsky 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. Westport, Conn.: Praeger.   Jackendoff 1972. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.   Kuno 1987. Functional syntax: Anaphora, discourse, and empathy. Chicago: U Chicago Press.   Longobardi 2001. The structure of DPs: Some principles, parameters, and problems. In Mark Baltin & Chris Collins (eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 562-603. Oxford: Blackwell.   Pollard & Sag 1992. Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. LI 23(2). 261-303.   Reinhart & Reuland 1993. Reflexivity. LI 24(4). 657-720.   Runner & Kaiser 2005. Binding in picture noun phrases: Implications for binding theory. Proc. HPSG05. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.73804.1-0389841/manifest

Comment

Related Items