Syntactic Theory

HPSG's Binding Theory

The presentation on this page follows the theory presented in Sag/Wasow/Bender 2003 (definitions adapted from p. 522).

Basic Definitions

The notion of argument structure is basic for HPSG's Binding Theory. See the page on selection in HPSG for some information and examples on argument structure.

Outranking

Principles A and B

Note:

• Principle A takes care of reflexive and reciprocle pronouns. Principle B takes care of personal pronouns and full NPs.

• Binding Theory in GB assumes a third principle, Principle C. In GB, Principle B accounts for the behavior of personal pronouns, Principle C for that of non-pronominal NPs. This distinction is not made in Sag/Wasow/Bender 2003.
  The empirical difference between personal pronouns and non-pronominal NPs can be seen in (1)-(3):
  Sentence (1) shows that personal pronoun in an embedded clause can be coindexed with an NP in the matrix clause.
  Sentences (2) and (3) show that a non-pronominal NP in an embedded clause must not be coindexed with an NP from the matrix clause.
  1. John_i thinks that he_i/j should go home soon.
  2. * He_i thinks that John_i should go home soon.
  3. He_j thinks that John_i should go home soon.

• Expletive NPs (expletive it and there) are specified as [MODE none]. This means that they are not subject to Binding Theory.

Binding in Prepositional Phrases

One of the highlights of HPSG's Binding Theory is the account of binding in prepositional phrases. The theory explains the following contrast:

1. a. Christopher_i talked to himself_i.
   b. * Christopher_i talked to him_i.
2. a. * The house_i has a fence around itself_i.
   b. The house_i has a fence around it_i.

This aspect of Binding Theory is explained in a lecture with slides.

Related Exercises

• Exercise on argument structure (ARG-ST) and valence
• More exercises on argument structure
• Binding in prepositional phrases
• Ungrammatical sentences