SYNTAX-15: The Binding Principles

[@afafjaber7777]

perfect

[@nohisocitutampoc2789]

Very interesting.

[@sarahsalhi760]

could u plz answer me how can we know that it is free or bound ?

[@bilalmohammed0]

All anaphors (reflexive pronouns) must be bound. There are three values, which are of the AGREEMENT feature, in which we evaluate how to correctly bind an antecedent to its anaphor. For example, 1a) Maria[i] loves herself[j]; b) Maria[i] loves herself[i]; c) We[i] love ourselves[i]; d) *John[i] loves himself[j]. Sentences of a-c are grammatical except for d which is ungrammatical. The reason is as follows: in (1a), the antecedent (Maria) agrees in number, person and gender with the anaphor: Num: singular, PERSON: 1st, GEN: feminine. In such a case, the anaphor (herself) receives all these values the antecedent (Maria) carries, so, the antecedent applies its values in AGREEMENT with the anaphor. The same is true with (b, c, d) except for the variation in gender, person, and number. Before determining how we met Principle A which says"an anaphor must be bound", we need to investigate why (d) is ungrammatical since the antecedent (he) agrees with the anaphor (himself) in person, number and gender. This inquiry leads us to something called INDEX. Indexing means that the anaphor referring back to the antecedent must be NOT someone else, rather, the anaphor should render to the same human entity the antecedent is representing. (The notation linguists use to help with establishing indexing is by borrowing letters from the alphabet, mainly the "i, j, k" or even any letter preferred. The letters borrowed, however, are placed after the antecedent and the anaphor.) In (1a) "Maria loves herself" means "Maria loves Maria," but not like (D) "John loves himself" which means "John loves someone's self" but not the self of John, which is yet ungrammatical. Hereafter, we'd say that the antecedents in (1a, b, c) are all co-indexed: each antecedent is delivered a correct reference from the anaphor, in contrast, (d) is not co-indexed for that the anaphor (himself) isn't referring back to its antecedent. Yet, coindexing is not enough to determine meeting the binding condition. How? We have to check a couple of significant principles: the c-command principle and the locality principle. To sum it up, A must asymmetrically c-command B if and only if B is within the domain clause of A. For instance, (1e) "Maria[i] thinks that John loves herself[i]" is ungrammatical because, though the antecedent (Maria) is out there in form along with the anaphor (herself), the CP that-clause is blocking any co-reference between the antecedent and the anaphor, and though (herself) is c-commanded by (Maria) and they are both co-indexed: in other terms. the anaphor (herself) is outside the domain of the NP Maria.

[@nohisocitutampoc2789]

@@bilalmohammed0 please, you should do a vídeo about the subject 😉.

[@rramaa_]

​@@bilalmohammed0 *headache*

[@israaaljobori4615]

🌸🌸🌸

[@wisslandin5780]

Thank you ,Sir

[@adilez311]

thank you sir ❤