Episode 4a. Binding Theory, Episode 4a. Binding Theory, NPIs, c-command.NPIs, c-command.

4.34.3

CAS LX 522CAS LX 522Syntax ISyntax I

A mysterious patternA mysterious pattern English (and most languages) have a couple of different English (and most languages) have a couple of different

ways to refer to individuals and entities.ways to refer to individuals and entities. JohnJohnjj saw himself saw himselfj/*kj/*k.. *John*Johnjj saw herself saw herselfj/kj/k.. JohnJohnjj saw him saw himk/*jk/*j.. JohnJohnjj saw her saw herk/#jk/#j.. *He*Hek/*jk/*j saw John saw Johnjj.. HisHisj/kj/k mother saw John mother saw Johnjj.. JohnJohnjj thinks that Mary likes him thinks that Mary likes himj/kj/k.. *John*Johnjj thinks that Mary likes himself thinks that Mary likes himselfj/kj/k.. JohnJohnjj thinks that he thinks that hej/kj/k is a genius. is a genius. *John*Johnjj thinks that himself thinks that himselfj/kj/k is a genius. is a genius.

When do you use anaphors (When do you use anaphors (-self-self forms)? Pronouns? What forms)? Pronouns? What determines the range of interpretations they can have?determines the range of interpretations they can have?

These are the questions These are the questions Binding TheoryBinding Theory strives to answer. strives to answer.

Binding TheoryBinding Theory

Binding Theory consists of three Binding Theory consists of three Principles that govern the allowed Principles that govern the allowed distribution of NPs.distribution of NPs.

Pronouns:Pronouns: hehe, , herher, , itit, , sheshe, …, … Anaphors:Anaphors: himselfhimself, , herselfherself, , itselfitself, …, …

R-expressions:R-expressions: JohnJohn, , the studentthe student, , ……

R-expressions and R-expressions and anaphorsanaphors

R-expressionsR-expressions are NPs like are NPs like PatPat, or , or the the professorprofessor, or , or an unlucky farmeran unlucky farmer, which , which get their meaning by get their meaning by referringreferring to to something in the world. Most NPs are something in the world. Most NPs are like this.like this.

An An anaphoranaphor does does notnot get its meaning get its meaning from something in the world—it depends from something in the world—it depends on something else in the sentence.on something else in the sentence. JohnJohn saw himself in the mirror. saw himself in the mirror. MaryMary bought herself a sandwich. bought herself a sandwich.

PronounsPronouns

A A pronounpronoun is similar to an is similar to an anaphor in that it doesn’t refer anaphor in that it doesn’t refer to something in the world but to something in the world but gets its reference from gets its reference from somewhere else.somewhere else. JohnJohn told Mary that he likes pizza. told Mary that he likes pizza. MaryMary wondered if she agreed. wondered if she agreed.

……but it doesn’t but it doesn’t needneed to be to be something in the sentence.something in the sentence. Mary concluded that he was crazy.Mary concluded that he was crazy.

The problemThe problem There are very specific configurations in There are very specific configurations in which pronouns, anaphors, and R-expressions which pronouns, anaphors, and R-expressions can/must be used. can/must be used. Even though both Even though both hehe and and himselfhimself could refer to could refer to JohnJohn below, you can’t below, you can’t just choose freely between them.just choose freely between them. John saw himself.John saw himself. *John saw him.*John saw him. John thinks that Mary likes him.John thinks that Mary likes him. *John thinks that Mary likes himself.*John thinks that Mary likes himself. John thinks that he is a genius.John thinks that he is a genius. *John thinks that himself is a genius.*John thinks that himself is a genius.

The question Binding Theory strives to answer The question Binding Theory strives to answer is: is: When do you use anaphors, pronouns, and R-When do you use anaphors, pronouns, and R-expressions?expressions?

Indices and antecedentsIndices and antecedents Anaphors and pronouns are Anaphors and pronouns are referentially dependentreferentially dependent; they can ; they can (or must) be (or must) be co-referential co-referential with with another NP in the sentence.another NP in the sentence.

The way we indicate that two NPs The way we indicate that two NPs are co-referential is by means of are co-referential is by means of an an indexindex, usually a subscripted , usually a subscripted letter. Two NPs that share the letter. Two NPs that share the same index (that are same index (that are coindexedcoindexed) ) also share the same referent.also share the same referent. JohnJohnii saw himself saw himselfii in the mirror. in the mirror.

Indices and antecedentsIndices and antecedents JohnJohnii saw himself saw himselfii in the mirror. in the mirror.

An index functions as a “pointer” into An index functions as a “pointer” into our mental model of the world.our mental model of the world.

John John here is a name that “points” to our mental here is a name that “points” to our mental representation of some guy, John, which we notate representation of some guy, John, which we notate by giving the pointing relation a label (“i”).by giving the pointing relation a label (“i”).

himself himself here shares the same pointing relation, here shares the same pointing relation, it “points” to the same guy John that it “points” to the same guy John that JohnJohn does. does.

So, any two NPs that share an index So, any two NPs that share an index (pointing relation) (pointing relation) necessarily necessarily refer refer to the same thing.to the same thing.

Indices and antecedentsIndices and antecedents

JohnJohnii saw himself saw himselfii in the mirror. in the mirror.

The NP from which an anaphor or The NP from which an anaphor or pronoun draws its reference is pronoun draws its reference is called the called the antecedentantecedent..

John John is the antecedent for is the antecedent for himselfhimself. . John John and and himself himself are co-are co-referential.referential.

Constraints on co-Constraints on co-referencereference

JohnJohnii saw himself saw himselfii.. *Himself*Himselfii saw John saw Johnii.. *John*Johnii’s mother saw himself’s mother saw himselfii..

It is impossible to assign the It is impossible to assign the same referent to same referent to John John and and himself himself in the second and third in the second and third sentences. What is different sentences. What is different between the good and bad between the good and bad sentences?sentences?

John’s motherJohn’s mother

John’s motherJohn’s mother is an NP. is an NP. [John’s mother][John’s mother]ii saw herself saw herselfii.. She saw John.She saw John.

But it’s an NP that is made up of But it’s an NP that is made up of smaller pieces (smaller pieces (John’sJohn’s and and mothermother).).

So what is the internal structure So what is the internal structure of the NP of the NP John’s motherJohn’s mother??

[[NPNP John’s mother] John’s mother]

Remember that pronouns come in three Remember that pronouns come in three distinguishable forms (in English):distinguishable forms (in English): I, he, sheI, he, she nominativenominative Me, him, herMe, him, her accusativeaccusative My, his, herMy, his, her genitivegenitive

The genitive case forms seem to have The genitive case forms seem to have pretty much the same kind of pretty much the same kind of “possessive” meaning that “possessive” meaning that John’sJohn’s does.does.

So, let’s suppose that So, let’s suppose that John’sJohn’s is the is the genitive case form of genitive case form of JohnJohn..

[[NPNP John’s mother] John’s mother]

Another point about Another point about John’s motherJohn’s mother is is that it seems that the head should that it seems that the head should be be mothermother..

John’sJohn’s sort of modifies sort of modifies mothermother.. Sort of like an adjective does… sort Sort of like an adjective does… sort of like an adverb does for a verb…of like an adverb does for a verb…

Let’s suppose Let’s suppose (for now! In chapter 7 (for now! In chapter 7 we’ll revise this)we’ll revise this) that that John’sJohn’s is is just adjoined to the NP just adjoined to the NP mothermother..

(Hard to draw clearly)(Hard to draw clearly)NP

motherJohn’sNPi NP

BindingBinding What is the difference between the What is the difference between the relationship between relationship between JohnJohn and and himselfhimself in in the first case and in the second case?the first case and in the second case?

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

BindingBinding We think of the position that We think of the position that JohnJohn is in in the is in in the first tree as being a position from which it first tree as being a position from which it “commands” the rest of the tree. It is “commands” the rest of the tree. It is hierarchically hierarchically superiorsuperior in a particular way. in a particular way.

Really, “non-inferior”Really, “non-inferior”

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

Tree relationsTree relations

A node X A node X c-commandsc-commands its sisters and the its sisters and the nodes dominated by nodes dominated by its sisters.its sisters.

A

B C

D E

Tree relationsTree relations

A node X A node X c-commandsc-commands its sisters and the its sisters and the nodes dominated by nodes dominated by its sisters.its sisters.

BB c-commands c-commands CC, , DD, , EE..

A

B C

D E

Tree relationsTree relations

A node X A node X c-commandsc-commands its sisters and the its sisters and the nodes dominated by nodes dominated by its sisters.its sisters.

BB c-commands c-commands CC, , DD, , EE.. DD c-commands c-commands EE..

A

B C

D E

Tree relationsTree relations

A node X A node X c-commandsc-commands its sisters and the its sisters and the nodes dominated by nodes dominated by its sisters.its sisters.

BB c-commands c-commands CC, , DD, , EE.. DD c-commands c-commands EE.. CC c-commands c-commands BB..

A

B C

D E

BindingBinding So, again what is the difference between So, again what is the difference between the relationship between the relationship between JohnJohn and and himselfhimself in the first case and in the second case?in the first case and in the second case?

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

BindingBinding In the first case, the NP In the first case, the NP JohnJohn c-commandsc-commands the NP the NP himselfhimself. But . But not in the second case.not in the second case.

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

BindingBinding When one NP When one NP c-commands and is c-commands and is coindexed withcoindexed with another NP, the another NP, the first is said to first is said to bindbind the other.the other.

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

BindingBinding DefinitionDefinition: A : A bindsbinds B iffB iff

A c-commands BA c-commands B A is coindexed with BA is coindexed with B “if and only if” “if and only if”

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

BindingBinding Principle APrinciple A of the Binding Theory of the Binding Theory (preliminary)(preliminary)::An anaphor must be bound.An anaphor must be bound.

A is for anaphor? That’s good enough for me…A is for anaphor? That’s good enough for me…

see himself

NP

NPiV

John

saw himself

NPi

VP

NPiV

VmotherJohn’s

NPi

* VP

V

NP

Principle APrinciple A This also explains why the This also explains why the following sentences are following sentences are ungrammatical:ungrammatical: *Himself*Himselfii saw John saw Johnii in the mirror. in the mirror.

*Herself*Herselfii likes Mary likes Maryii’s father.’s father.

*Himself*Himselfii likes Mary’s father likes Mary’s fatherii..

There is nothing that c-commands and There is nothing that c-commands and is coindexed with is coindexed with himselfhimself and and herselfherself. The anaphors are not bound, . The anaphors are not bound, which violates Principle A.which violates Principle A.

Binding domainsBinding domains But this is not the end of the story; But this is not the end of the story; considerconsider *John*Johnii said that himself said that himselfii likes pizza. likes pizza.

*John*Johnii said that Mary called himself said that Mary called himselfii..

In these sentences the NP In these sentences the NP JohnJohn c- c-commands and is coindexed with (=binds) commands and is coindexed with (=binds) himselfhimself, satisfying our preliminary , satisfying our preliminary version of Principle A—but the sentences version of Principle A—but the sentences are ungrammatical.are ungrammatical. John didn’t say that anyone likes pizza.John didn’t say that anyone likes pizza. John didn’t say that Mary called anyone.John didn’t say that Mary called anyone.

Binding domainsBinding domains

JohnJohnii saw himself saw himselfii in the mirror. in the mirror.

JohnJohnii gave a book to himself gave a book to himselfii..

*John*Johnii said that himself said that himselfii is a genius. is a genius.

*John*Johnii said that Mary dislikes said that Mary dislikes himselfhimselfii..

What is wrong? What is wrong? JohnJohn binds binds himselfhimself in every case. What is different?in every case. What is different?

In the ungrammatical cases, In the ungrammatical cases, himselfhimself is in an embedded clause. is in an embedded clause.

Binding domainsBinding domains It seems that not only does an It seems that not only does an anaphor need to be bound, it needs anaphor need to be bound, it needs to be bound nearby (or to be bound nearby (or locallylocally).).

Principle A Principle A (revised):(revised):An anaphor must be bound in its An anaphor must be bound in its binding domain.binding domain.

Binding DomainBinding Domain (preliminary): (preliminary):The binding domain of an anaphor is The binding domain of an anaphor is the smallest clause containing it.the smallest clause containing it.

PronounsPronouns

*John*Johnii saw him saw himii in the mirror. in the mirror.

JohnJohnii said that he said that heii is a genius. is a genius.

JohnJohnii said that Mary dislikes him said that Mary dislikes himii..

JohnJohnii saw him saw himjj in the mirror. in the mirror.

How does the distribution of How does the distribution of pronouns differ from the pronouns differ from the distribution of anaphors?distribution of anaphors?

It looks like it is just the It looks like it is just the oppositeopposite..

Principle BPrinciple B

Principle BPrinciple BA pronoun must be free in its binding A pronoun must be free in its binding domain.domain.

FreeFreeNot boundNot bound

*John*Johnii saw him saw himii.. JohnJohnii’s mother saw him’s mother saw himii..

B is for bpronoun, that’s good enough for me.B is for bpronoun, that’s good enough for me.

Principle CPrinciple C

We now know where pronouns and We now know where pronouns and anaphors are allowed. Consider the anaphors are allowed. Consider the following.following.

*Stuart*Stuartii saw him saw himii in the mirror. in the mirror. StuartStuartii’s mother saw him in the ’s mother saw him in the mirror.mirror.

*He*Heii saw Stuart saw Stuartii in the mirror. in the mirror. HisHisii mother saw Stuart mother saw Stuartii in the in the mirror.mirror.

Principle CPrinciple C

What’s going wrong with these What’s going wrong with these sentences? The pronouns are unbound sentences? The pronouns are unbound as needed for Principle B. What are as needed for Principle B. What are the binding relations here?the binding relations here?

*He*Heii likes John likes Johnii..

*She*Sheii said that Mary said that Maryii fears clowns. fears clowns.

HisHisii mother likes John mother likes Johnii..

HisHisii mother said that John mother said that Johnii fears fears clowns.clowns.

Principle CPrinciple C

Binding is a means of assigning Binding is a means of assigning reference.reference.

R-expressions have intrinsic R-expressions have intrinsic reference; they can’t be assigned reference; they can’t be assigned their reference from somewhere else.their reference from somewhere else.

R-expressions can’t be bound, at all.R-expressions can’t be bound, at all. Principle CPrinciple CAn R-expression must be free.An R-expression must be free.

C is for r-eCspression… oh, never mind.C is for r-eCspression… oh, never mind.

Binding TheoryBinding Theory Principle A.Principle A. An anaphor must be bound An anaphor must be bound in its binding domain.in its binding domain.

Principle B.Principle B. A pronoun must be free A pronoun must be free in its binding domain.in its binding domain.

Principle C.Principle C. An R-expression must be An R-expression must be free.free.

The The binding domainbinding domain for an anaphor is for an anaphor is the smallest clause that contains it.the smallest clause that contains it.

BoundBound: coindexed with a c-commanding : coindexed with a c-commanding antecedent (antecedent (FreeFree: not bound).: not bound).

Constraints on Constraints on interpretationinterpretation

Binding Theory is about Binding Theory is about interpretation.interpretation.

Only a structure that satisfies Only a structure that satisfies Binding Theory is Binding Theory is interpretableinterpretable..

Lexicon

Workbench

Merge

pronounce

interpret

Constraints on Constraints on interpretationinterpretation

If we put together a tree that If we put together a tree that isn’t interpretable, the isn’t interpretable, the process (derivation) is process (derivation) is sometimes said to sometimes said to crashcrash..

Lexicon

Workbench

Merge

pronounce

interpret

Constraints on Constraints on interpretationinterpretation

If we succeed in putting together a If we succeed in putting together a tree that is interpretable tree that is interpretable (satisfying the constraints), we (satisfying the constraints), we say the process (derivation) say the process (derivation) convergesconverges..

Lexicon

Workbench

Merge

pronounce

interpret

Negative Polarity ItemsNegative Polarity Items

Certain words in English seem to only Certain words in English seem to only be available in “negative” contexts. be available in “negative” contexts. Pat didn’t invite anyone to the party.Pat didn’t invite anyone to the party. Pat does not know anything about syntax.Pat does not know anything about syntax. Pat hasn’t ever been to London.Pat hasn’t ever been to London. Pat hasn’t seen Pat hasn’t seen Forrest GumpForrest Gump yet. yet. *Pat invited anyone to the party.*Pat invited anyone to the party. *Pat knows anything about syntax.*Pat knows anything about syntax. *Pat has ever been to London.*Pat has ever been to London. *Pat has seen *Pat has seen Forrest GumpForrest Gump yet. yet.

Negative Polarity ItemsNegative Polarity Items

These are called These are called negative polarity negative polarity itemsitems..

They include They include everever, , yetyet, , anyoneanyone, , anythinganything, , any Nany N, as well as some , as well as some idiomatic ones like idiomatic ones like lift a fingerlift a finger and and a red centa red cent.. Pat didn’t lift a finger to help.Pat didn’t lift a finger to help. Pat didn’t have a red cent.Pat didn’t have a red cent. *Pat lifted a finger to help.*Pat lifted a finger to help. *Pat had a red cent.*Pat had a red cent.

LicensingLicensing NPIs are only allowed to appear if there’s a NPIs are only allowed to appear if there’s a negative in the sentence.negative in the sentence. John didn’t invite Mary to the party, did he?John didn’t invite Mary to the party, did he? John didn’t invite anyone to the party.John didn’t invite anyone to the party. John invited Mary to the party, didn’t he?John invited Mary to the party, didn’t he? *John invited anyone to the party.*John invited anyone to the party. Nobody invited Mary to the party, did they?Nobody invited Mary to the party, did they? Nobody invited anyone to the party.Nobody invited anyone to the party.

Negation gives an NPI “license to appear”: Negation gives an NPI “license to appear”: NPIs are NPIs are licensedlicensed by negation by negation in a sentence. in a sentence.

Just like you need a driver’s license to drive a car Just like you need a driver’s license to drive a car (legally), you need negation to use a NPI (legally), you need negation to use a NPI (grammatically).(grammatically).

AnyAny Just to introduce a complication right away, there Just to introduce a complication right away, there isis a positive-polarity version of a positive-polarity version of anyany that has a that has a different meaning, known as the “free choice different meaning, known as the “free choice anyany” ” meaning. This meaning is distinguishable meaning. This meaning is distinguishable (intuitively) from the NPI (intuitively) from the NPI anyany meaning, and we are meaning, and we are concentrating only on the NPI concentrating only on the NPI anyany meaning—for now, we meaning—for now, we will just consider will just consider anyany to be ambiguous, like to be ambiguous, like bankbank.. John read anything the professor gave him.John read anything the professor gave him. Anyone who can understand syntax is a genius.Anyone who can understand syntax is a genius.

In fact, there are a couple of things other than In fact, there are a couple of things other than negation that license NPIs; we’ll ignore them for negation that license NPIs; we’ll ignore them for now.now. Pick any card.Pick any card. Did anyone bring cake?Did anyone bring cake?

Negative Polarity ItemsNegative Polarity Items

But it isn’t quite as simple as But it isn’t quite as simple as that. Consider:that. Consider: I didn’t see anyone.I didn’t see anyone. *I saw anyone.*I saw anyone. *Anyone didn’t see me.*Anyone didn’t see me. *Anyone saw me.*Anyone saw me.

It seems that simply having negation It seems that simply having negation in the sentence isn’t in the sentence isn’t by itselfby itself enough to license the use of an NPI.enough to license the use of an NPI.

Negative Polarity ItemsNegative Polarity Items

As a first pass, we might say that As a first pass, we might say that negation has to negation has to precedeprecede the NPI. the NPI. I didn’t see anyone. Nobody saw I didn’t see anyone. Nobody saw anyone.anyone.

*Anyone didn’t see me. *Anyone saw *Anyone didn’t see me. *Anyone saw nobody.nobody.

But that’s not quite it either.But that’s not quite it either. *[The picture of nobody] pleased *[The picture of nobody] pleased anyone.anyone.

Negative Polarity ItemsNegative Polarity Items

*[The picture of nobody] surprised *[The picture of nobody] surprised anyoneanyone

Nothing surprised anyoneNothing surprised anyone

VP

V NP

NP

The picture of nobodysurprised anyone

V

nothing

suprisedanyone

NPi

VP

NPiV

V

Exercise to ponderExercise to ponder Young kids (5-6 years) seem to accept Young kids (5-6 years) seem to accept sentences like (1) as meaning what (2) means sentences like (1) as meaning what (2) means for adults.for adults. (1) Mama Bear is pointing to her.(1) Mama Bear is pointing to her. (2) Mama Bear is pointing to herself.(2) Mama Bear is pointing to herself.

Suppose that, contrary to appearances, kids Suppose that, contrary to appearances, kids dodo know and obey Principle B. Look carefully know and obey Principle B. Look carefully at the definitions of Binding Theory. If at the definitions of Binding Theory. If Principle B isn’t the problem, what do you Principle B isn’t the problem, what do you think kids are getting wrong to allow (1) to think kids are getting wrong to allow (1) to have the meaning of (2)?have the meaning of (2)? Think in particular about how you decide which Think in particular about how you decide which index to assign to index to assign to herher. What is the implication of . What is the implication of having the same index? What is the implication of having the same index? What is the implication of having different indices?having different indices?