Making a pronoun: Fake indexicals as windows into the properties of pronouns

Linguistic Inquiry

Volumn 40, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 187-237

  Kratzer, Angelika ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Agreement; Fake indexicals; Local anaphora; Long distance anaphora; Meaning of pronominal features; Typology of pronouns

Indexed keywords

EID: 67649204733     PISSN: 00243892     EISSN: 00243892     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/ling.2009.40.2.187     Document Type: Article

References (130)

1. Adger, David. 2006. Combinatorial variability. Journal of Linguistics 42:503-530.
2. Adger, David, and Gillian Ramchand. 2005. Merge and Move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 36:161-193.
3. Anand, Pranav. 2006. De de se. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
4. Anand, Pranav, and Andrew Nevins. 2004. Shifty operators in changing contexts. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) XIV, ed. by Robert B. Young, 20-37. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.
5. Barlow, Michael. 1988. A situated theory of agreement. Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
6. Benveniste, Émile. 1966. Problèmes de linguistique générale. Paris: Gallimard.
7. Berman, Stephen. 1987. Situation-based semantics for adverbs of quantification. In University of Massachusetts occasional papers 12, ed. by James Blevins and Anne Vainikka, 46-68. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistic Student Association.
8. Bernstein, Judy B. 2001. The DP hypothesis: Identifying clausal properties in the nominal domain. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, ed. by Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, 536-561. Oxford: Blackwell.
9. Bhatt, Rajesh. 2002. The raising analysis of relative clauses: Evidence from adjectival modifiers. Natural Language Semantics 10:43-90.
10. Bhatt, Rajesh. 2005. Long-distance agreement in Hindi-Urdu. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 23: 757-807.
11. Bianchi, Valentina. 1999. Consequences of antisymmetry: Headed relative clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
12. Blevins, James P. To appear. Feature-based grammar. In Non-transformational syntax, ed. by Robert D. Borsley and Kersti Börjars. Oxford: Blackwell.
13. Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2006. Where's Φ? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In Leiden working papers in linguistics 3.2, ed. by Marjo van Koppen, Pepijn Hendriks, Frank Landsbergen, Mika Poss, and Jenneke van der Wal, 1-23. Leiden: Leiden University Centre for Linguistics.
14. Borer, Hagit. 1989. Anaphoric AGR. In The null subject parameter, ed. by Osvaldo Jaeggli and Kenneth J. Safir, 69-109. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
15. Borer, Hagit. 2005a. Structuring sense. Vol. 1, In name only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16. Borer, Hagit. 2005b. Structuring sense. Vol. 2, The normal course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
17. Bowers, John. 1993. The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24:591-656.
18. Bowers, John. 2001. Predication. In The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, ed. by Mark Baltin and Chris Collins, 299-333. Oxford: Blackwell.
19. Bresnan, Joan, Ashwini Deo, and Devyani Sharma. 2006. Typology and variation: A probabilistic approach to be and n't in the Survey of English Dialects. English Language and Linguistics 11:301-346.
20. Büring, Daniel. 2005. Binding theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Cable, Seth. 2005. Binding local person pronouns without semantically empty features. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
22. Chierchia, Gennaro. 1989. Anaphors and attitudes de se. In Language in context, ed. by Renate Bartsch, Johan van Benthem, and Peter van Emde Boas, 1-32. Dordrecht: Foris.
23. Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. by Roger Martin, David Michaels, and Juan Uriagereka, 89-155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Chomsky, Noam. 2004. Beyond explanatory adequacy. In The cartography of syntactic structures. Vol. 3, Structures and beyond, ed. by Adriana Belletti, 104-131. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26. Chomsky, Noam. 2005. Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36:1-22.
27. Chung, Sandra. 1998. The design of agreement: Evidence from Chamorro. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28. Cooper, Robin. 1983. Quantification and syntactic theory. Dordrecht: Reidel.
29. Corbett, Greville. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
30. Corbett, Greville. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Corbett, Greville. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Corbett, Greville, and Marianne Mithun. 1996. Associative forms in a typology of number systems: Evidence from Yup'ik. Journal of Linguistics 32:1-17.
33. Cysouw, Michael. 2003. The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34. Deal, Amy Rose. 2007. Case and caselessness in Nez Perce. Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
35. Dowty, David, and Pauline Jacobson. 1989. Agreement as a semantic phenomenon. In Proceedings of Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL) 1988, ed. by Joyce Powers and Kenneth de Jong, 95-101. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.
36. Elbourne, Paul. 2001. E-type anaphora as NP-deletion. Natural Language Semantics 9:241-288.
37. Elbourne, Paul. 2002. Situations and individuals. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
38. Elbourne, Paul. 2005. Situations and individuals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Findreng, Ådne. 1976. Zur Kongruenz in Person und Numerus zwischen Subjekt und finitem Verb im modernen Deutsch. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. [non vidi]
40. Finer, Daniel. 1984. The formal grammar of switch reference. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
41. Finer, Daniel. 1985. The syntax of switch reference. Linguistic Inquiry 16:35-55.
42. Forchheimer, Paul. 1953. The category of person in language. Berlin: de Gruyter.
43. Frampton, John, and Sam Gutmann. 2002. Crash-proof syntax. In Derivation and explanation in the Minimalist Program, ed. by Samuel David Epstein and T. Daniel Seely, 90-105. Oxford: Blackwell.
44. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1988. The first person dual as an ambiguous category. Studies in Language 12:1-18.
45. Hale, Ken. 1992. Subject obviation, switch reference, and control. In Control and grammar, ed. by Richard K. Larson, Sabine Iatridou, Utpal Lahiri, and James Higginbotham, 51-77. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
46. Halle, Morris. 1997. Distributed Morphology: Impoverishment and fission. In PF: Papers at the interface, ed. by Benjamin Bruening, Yoonjung Kang, and Martha McGinnis, 425-449. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 30. Cambridge, MA: MIT, MIT Working Papers in Linguistics.
47. Halle, Morris, and Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection. In The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, ed. by Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, 111-176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Harbour, Daniel. 2006a. Numerus: Der morphologische Gebrauch semantischer Atome. Ms., University of Leipzig.
49. Harbour, Daniel. 2006b. Person hierarchy and geometry without hierarchies or geometries. Paper presented at Workshop on Theoretical Morphology, University of Leipzig.
50. Harley, Heidi, and Elizabeth Ritter. 2002. Person and number in pronouns: A feature-geometric analysis. Language 78:482-526.
51. Heim, Irene. 1982. The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
52. Heim, Irene. 1990. E-type pronouns and donkey anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 13:137-178.
53. Heim, Irene. 1994. Puzzling reflexive pronouns in de se reports. Paper presented at Bielefeld Conference on Indexicals. University of Bielefeld. Available at http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/mVkNjZlY/Bielefeld%20handout%2094.pd f.
54. Heim, Irene. 2005. Features on bound pronouns. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
55. Heim, Irene. 2007. Person and number on bound and partially bound pronouns. Ms., MIT, Cambridge, MA.
56. Heim, Irene, and Angelika Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
57. Hendrick, Randall. 1988. Anaphora in Celtic and Universal Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
58. Herslund, Michael. 1986. The double object construction in Danish. In Topics in Scandinavian syntax, ed. by Lars Hellan and Kirsti Koch Christensen, 125-147. Dordrecht: Reidel.
59. Higginbotham, James. 1983. Logical Form, binding, and nominals. Linguistic Inquiry 14:395-420.
60. Hole, Daniel. 2005. Reconciling "possessor" datives and "beneficiary" datives: Towards a unified voice account of dative binding in German. In Event arguments: Foundations and applications, ed. by Claudia Maienborn and Angelika Wöllstein, 213-242. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
61. Hulsey, Sarah, and Uli Sauerland. 2006. Sorting out relative clauses. Natural Language Semantics 14: 111-137.
62. Hyman, Larry M. 1979. Phonology and noun structure: Aghem grammatical structure. In Southern California occasional papers in linguistics 7, ed. by Larry M. Hyman, 1-72. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Department of Linguistics.
63. Ingria, Robert. 1990. The limits of unification. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 194-204. Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics.
64. Ito, Junko, and Armin Mester. 2000. "Ich, der ich sechzig bin": An agreement puzzle. In Jorge Hankamer WebFest, ed. by Sandra Chung, Jim McCloskey, and Nathan Sanders. Santa Cruz: University of California, Department of Linguistics. Available at http://ling.ucsc.edu/Jorge/index.html.
65. Kahnemuyipour, Arsalan. 2004. The syntax of sentential stress. Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto.
66. Kamp, Hans. 1981. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Formal methods in the study of language, ed. by Jeroen Groenendijk, Theo Janssen, and Martin Stokhof, 1-41. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam, Mathematical Centre.
67. Kayne, Richard. 1994. The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
68. Kiparsky, Paul. 1973. "Elsewhere" in phonology. In A festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. by Paul Kiparsky and Stephen Anderson, 93-106. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
69. Koopman, Hilda. 2003. The locality of agreement and the structure of the DP in Maasai. In The role of agreement in natural language: TLS 5 Proceedings, ed. by William E. Griffin, 207-227. Austin: University of Texas, Department of Linguistics. Available at http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~tls/2001tls/Koopman.pdf.
70. Koopman, Hilda. 2006. Agreement configurations: In defense of "spec head." In Agreement systems, ed. by Cedric Boeckx, 159-199. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
71. Kramer, Ruth. To appear. VSO and SVO word order in Middle Egyptian. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual North American Conference on Afroasiatic Linguistics, ed. by Charles G. Häberl. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
72. Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Phrase structure and the lexicon, ed. by Johan Rooryck and Laurie Zaring, 109-137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
73. Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. More structural analogies between pronouns and tenses. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) VIII, ed. by Devon Strolovitch and Aaron Lawson, 92-109. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.
74. Kratzer, Angelika. 2004. Telicity and the meaning of objective case. In The syntax of tense, ed. by Jacqueline Guéron and Jacqueline Lecarme, 389-423. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
75. Kratzer, Angelika. To appear. On the plurality of verbs. In Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation, ed. by Tatjana Heyde-Zybatow and Johannes Dölling. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
76. Kratzer, Angelika, and Elisabeth Selkirk. 2007. Phase theory and prosodic spellout: The case of verbs. The Linguistic Review 24:93-135.
77. Krifka, Manfred. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In Lexical matters, ed. by Ivan Sag and Anna Szabolcsi, 29-53. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
78. Krifka, Manfred. 2005. A note on the pronoun system and the predicate marker in Tok Pisin. Ms., Humboldt University, Berlin.
79. Kuiper, A., and V. Pickett. 1974. Personal pronouns in Diuxi Mixtec. In Summer Institute of Linguistics: Mexico Working Papers 1, 53-58. [non vidi]
80. Lees, Robert. 1960. The grammar of English nominalization. The Hague: Mouton.
81. Link, Godehard. 1983. The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretic approach. In Meaning, use, and interpretation of language, ed. by Rainer Bäuerle, Christoph Schwarze, and Arnim von Stechow, 302-323. Berlin: de Gruyter.
82. Longobardi, Giuseppe. 1994. Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and Logical Form. Linguistic Inquiry 25:609-665.
83. Moravcsik, Edith A. 1978. Agreement. In Universals of human language, ed. by Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson, and Edith Moravcsik, 331-374. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
84. Moravcsik, Edith A. 2003. A semantic analysis of associative plurals. Studies in Language 27:469-503.
85. Morzycki, Marcin. 2005. Mediated modification: Functional structure and the interpretation of modifier positions. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
86. Moulton, Keir. 2005. Strong reflexivity and attitudes de se: Evidence from English ECM. Paper presented at ConSOLE XVI, University of the Basque Country, December 20.
87. Moulton, Keir. In preparation. Natural selection and the syntax of clausal complementation. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
88. Nakanishi, Kimiko, and Satoshi Tomioka. 2004. Japanese plurals are exceptional. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 13:113-140.
89. Neale, Stephen. 1990. Descriptions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
90. Noyer, Rolf. 1992. Features, positions, and affixes in autonomous morphological structure. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
91. Partee, Barbara. 1989. Binding implicit variables in quantified contexts. In Papers from the 25th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Part One, The General Session, ed. by Caroline Wiltshire, Randolph Graczyk, and Bradley Music, 342-365. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.
92. Percus, Orin, and Uli Sauerland. 2003a. On the LFs of attitude reports. In Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 7, ed. by Matthias Weisgerber, 228-242. Konstanz: University of Konstanz, Department of Linguistics.
93. Percus, Orin, and Uli Sauerland. 2003b. Pronoun binding in dream reports. In Proceedings of North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 33, ed. by Makoto Kadowaki and Shigeto Kawahara, 265-283. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistic Student Association.
94. Pesetsky, David, and Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation, ed. by Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, and Wendy Wilkins, 262-294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
95. Pollard, Carl, and Ivan Sag. 1992. Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry 23:261-303.
96. Pollard, Carl, and Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
97. Postal, Paul. 1966. On so-called "pronouns" in English. In Report of the Seventh Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, ed. by Paul L. Garvin, 177-206. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
98. Potts, Christopher. 2003. The logic of conventional implicatures. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.
99. Potts, Christopher. 2005. The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
100. Potts, Christopher, and Shigeto Kawahara. 2004. Japanese honorifics as emotive definite descriptions. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 14, ed. by Kazuha Watanabe and Robert B. Young, 235-254. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.
101. Pylkkänen, Liina. 2002. Introducing arguments. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
102. Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
103. Reinhart, Tanya. 2006. Interface strategies: Optimal and costly computations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
104. Reinhart, Tanya, and Eric Reuland. 1991. Anaphors and logophors: An argument structure perspective. In Long-distance anaphora, ed. by Jan Koster and Eric Reuland, 283-321. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
105. Reinhart, Tanya, and Eric Reuland. 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry 24:657-720.
106. Reuland, Eric. 2007. Minimal versus not so minimal pronouns: Feature transmission versus feature deletion. Ms., Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, OTS.
107. Ritter, Elizabeth. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Syntax and semantics 26, ed. by Susan Rothstein, 37-62. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
108. Ritter, Elizabeth. 1993. Where's gender? Linguistic Inquiry 24:795-803.
109. Rizzi, Luigi. 1990a. On the anaphor agreement effect. Rivista di Linguistica 2:27-42.
110. Rizzi, Luigi. 1990b. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
111. Rullmann, Hotze. 2003. Bound-variable pronouns and the semantics of number. In Proceedings of the Western Conference on Linguistics (WECOL) 2002, ed. by Brian Agbayani, Paivi Koskinen, and Vida Samiian, 243-254. Fresno: California State University, Department of Linguistics.
112. Rullmann, Hotze. 2004. First and second person pronouns as bound variables. Linguistic Inquiry 35:159-168.
113. Sauerland, Uli. 2003. A new semantics for number. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) XIII, ed. by Robert B. Young and Yuping Zhou, 258-275. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, CLC Publications.
114. Sauerland, Uli, Jan Anderssen, and Kazuko Yatsushiro. 2005. The plural is semantically unmarked. In Linguistic evidence, ed. by Stephan Kepser and Marga Reis, 413-434. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
115. Schlenker, Philippe. 1999. Propositional attitudes and indexicality: A cross-categorial approach. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
116. Schlenker, Philippe. 2003. A plea for monsters. Linguistics and Philosophy 26:29-120.
117. Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
118. Sportiche, Dominique. 1985. Remarks on crossover. Linguistic Inquiry 16:460-469.
119. Stechow, Arnim von. 2003a. Feature deletion under semantic binding. In Proceedings of North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 33, ed. by Makoto Kadowaki and Shigeto Kawahara, 377-403. Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistic Student Association.
120. Stechow, Arnim von. 2003b. Postscript to "Feature deletion under semantic binding." Ms., University of Tübingen.
121. Steedman, Mark. 2000. The syntactic process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
122. Thomas, David D. 1955. Three analyses of the Ilocano pronoun system. Word 11:204-208.
123. Tomioka, Satoshi. 2006. Plural indexicals in Japanese and beyond. Handout. ZAS, Berlin.
124. Wechsler, Stephen. 2004. Number as person. In Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 5, ed. by Olivier Bonami and Patricia Cabredo Hofherr, 255-274. Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris. Available at http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss5/.
125. Williams, Edwin. 1980. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11:203-238.
126. Winter, Yoad. 2001. Flexible principles in Boolean semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
127. Winter, Yoad. 2002. Atoms and sets. Linguistic Inquiry 33:493-505.
128. Woolford, Ellen. 1999. More on the anaphor agreement effect. Linguistic Inquiry 30:257-287.
129. Zwart, C. Jan-Wouter. 2000. A head raising analysis of relative clauses in Dutch. In The syntax of relative clauses, ed. by Artemis Alexiadou, 349-385. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
130. Zwicky, Arnold. 1977. Hierarchies of person. In Papers from the Thirteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, ed. by Woodford A. Beach, Samuel E. Fox, and Shulamith Philosoph, 714-733. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.