SYNTAX

BINDING THEORY
DESCRIBING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN NOUNS
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 2

Learning Objectives

• 1. Identify and distinguish R-expressions,

pronouns and anaphors.
• 2. Understand antecedent and anaphor.
• 3. Distinguish coindexing from binding.
• 4. Define and apply binding to a tree.
• 5. Apply principles A, B, C to a tree.
• 6. Identify binding domains.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 3

Binding Theory
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 4

R-expressions
(=Referring expressions)
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 5

Anaphors

Herself must refer to Heidi. It can’t refer to Arthur,

Miriam or Andrea. It must get its meaning from a
PREVIOUS word in the sentence (in this case
Heidi).
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 6

Pronouns
Pronouns are NPS that can optionally get their meaning
from another NP in the sentence, but may also optionally
get it from somewhere else (including context or previous
sentences in the discourse).
Art said that he played basketball.
Art said that Art played basketball.
Art said that Noam played basketball.

Typical pronouns include: he, she, it, I, you, me, we, they, us,
him, her, them, his, her, your, my, our, their, and one.

Pronoun: An NP that may (but need not) get its meaning

from another word in the sentence.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 7

Antecedent
Antecedent: An NP that gives its meaning to another
NP (pronoun or anaphor).
Heidi bopped herself on the head with a zucchini.
antecedent anaphor

N.B. Antecedents do not need to precede the noun

they give their meaning to:
Everyone who knows him loves Dan.
pronoun antecedent
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 8

Indexing
• A way to indicate that two NPs refer to the same entity.
• After each NP we write a subscript letter. If the NPs refer to
the same entity, then they get the same letter. If they refer to
different entities, they get different letters.
a) [Colin]i gave [Andrea]j [a basketball]k.
b) [Art]i said that [he]j played [basketball]k in [the dark]l.
c) [Art]i said that [he]i played [basketball]k in [the dark]l.
d) [Heidi]i bopped [herself]i on [the head]j with [a zucchini]k.

• Without the indices, sentence (b) is ambiguous; he can refer to

Art or to someone else. But with indexing, we disambiguate
this form. He is not Art, but someone else – he and Art have
different indexes.
• In (c) and (d), he and herself refer back to Art and Heidi
respectively, so they get the same index.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 9

Co-indexing and co-reference

• Two NPs that have the same index are said to be co-
indexed.
• Two NPs that are co-indexed with each other are said to
co-refer (i.e., refer to the same entity in the world).

a) [Art]i said that [he]i played [basketball]k in [the dark]l.

b) [Heidi]i bopped [herself]i on [the head]j with [a zucchini]k.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 10

Syntactic Restrictions on Anaphors

(=The distribution of anaphors)
a. Heidii bopped herselfi on the head with a zucchini.

b. [Heidii’s mother]k bopped herselfk on the head with a zucchini.

c. *[Heidii’s mother]k bopped herselfi on the head with a zucchini.

➢The antecedent for an anaphor can be the subject of the

sentence, but not an NP embedded inside the subject NP.

Let’s look at this distinction in terms of structural relations.

 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 11

Syntactic Restrictions on Anaphors

Unlike the anaphor in the sentence on the left, the anaphor herself on the
right isn’t within the C-command domain of the antecedent NP (or isn’t
C-commanded by the antecedent).
Describing the relationship between an anaphor and an antecedent, we
need a more specific notion than simple co-indexation. This is binding.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 12

Binding
• This fact is captured by binding:
• A binds B iff
•A c-commands B, and
•A and B are co-indexed.
• Note: Binding is not the same as co-indexing!!! (Co-indexing
has the same index; binding requires a c-commanded
relationship between the co-indexed elements.)

• Binding is a SPECIAL kind of c-command; co-indexation

alone does not constitute binding.

• Binding requires both co-indexation and c-command.

 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 13

The principal that deals with anaphors

• Binding Principal A (to be revised): An anaphor must bound.
• In other words, an anaphor must be c-commanded and co-
indexed by an antecedent.

• Coindexed? Yes • Coindexed? Yes

• C-commanded? Yes • C-commanded? No
Not Bound
Bound
• • Violates Principal A
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 14

Locality restrictions on anaphor binding

• *Heidii said that herselfi discoed with Art.
*
• The anaphor is bound by its
antecedent: Heidi c-commands
herself and is coindexed with
it. This sentence is predicted to
be grammatical by the version
of Principle A.
• Surprisingly, however, the
sentence is ungrammatical
because the anaphor is an
embedded clause.
• The anaphor seems to need to find its antecedent in the same clause.
This is called a locality constraint. The anaphor’s antecedent must be
near it or “local” in some way. The syntactic space in which an anaphor
must find its antecedent is called a binding domain.
• Binding domain:: The clause containing the anaphor (or pronoun).
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 15

Locality restrictions on anaphor binding

• Heidii danced with herselfi.
• *Heidii said that herselfi danced with Art
• The anaphor
must be bound
within the
clause that
contains it. It
must bound
within its
binding
domain.
• Coindexed? Yes • Coindexed? Yes
• C-command? Yes→Bound • C-command? Yes→Bound
• Bound in domain? Yes • Bound in domain? No
• Violtaes Principle A
• Binding Principal A (revised): An anaphor must be bound in its
binding domain.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 16

Interim summay
Principle A imposes TWO restrictions:
1. The anaphor must be bound= both c-commanded
and coindexed AND
2. The anaphor must be bound (find its antecedent)
within its own clause (the binding domain)

Note that the restriction is not that an anaphor needs to

be simply bound. An anaphor can be bound, yet the
sentence is still ungrammatical if it isn’t bound locally.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 17

The Distribution of Pronouns

a. Heidii bopped herk on the head with a zucchini.
b. *Heidii bopped heri on the head with a zucchini.
➢ The pronouns her in b is c-commanded and coindexed
within its own clause. Yet, it is ungrammatical????
➢The only restriction on pronouns: They cannot be bound by
an antecedent in the same clause.
c. Heidii said [cp that shei danced with Art]. Bound
d. Heidii said [cp that shek danced with Art]. Free
➢ Pronouns have almost the reversed kind of relationship with
their antecedents (=This is exactly the opposite of where
anaphors are allowed). This restriction is called Principle B.
Principle B: A pronoun must be free in its binding domain.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 18

The Distribution of Pronouns

Coindexed? Yes Coindexed? Yes

C-command? Yes Bound C-command? Yes Bound
Free in domain? No Free in domain? Free
VIOLATES PRINCIPLE B MEETS PRINCIPLE B
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 19

The Distribution of Pronouns

Coindexed? No not Bound Coindexed? No not Bound

Free in domain? Yes Free in domain? Yes
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 20

An Intuitive Idea about The

Distribution of Pronouns
❖Anaphors are like two-year-olds. They want to
be bound in their domain. They like to be
dependent on someone else. They want to be
near their parents/antecedents.

❖Pronouns are like teenagers. They want to be

free from their parents/antecedents. They want
to be far away their parents whenever they can.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 21

The Distribution of R-expressions

• R-expressions don’t seem to allow any instances of binding
at all, not within the binding domain and not outside it either.
a. *Heidii kissed Miriami .
b. *Shei kissed Heidii .
c. *Shei said that Heidii was a disco queen.
▪ Referring expressions receive their meaning from outside the
sentence (i.e., from the context/the world).
▪ They don’t get their meaning from another word in the
sentence (via binding).
▪ Principle C: An R-expression must be free.
➢ So, R-expressions must be free everywhere. They can’t be
bound at all. R-expressions are like hermits; they don’t like to have
antecedents at all ever anywhere.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 22

The Distribution of R-expressions

Coindexed? Yes Coindexed? Yes

C-command? Yes Bound C-command? Yes Bound
Free? No Free? No
VIOLATES PRINCIPLE C VIOLATES PRINCIPLE C
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 23

▪ A common confusion:
▪ Binding is asymmetric. The antecedent binds the
anaphor/pronoun, but NOT vice versa!

▪ A common mistake:
▪ *Shei loves Maryi .
▪ The antecedent (binder) here is she, not Mary (bindee).
▪ This is because she is coindexed with Mary and c-
commands Mary, and not vice versa.
▪ Just because Mary is an R-expression doesn’t make it a
binder.
▪ This is principle C violation.
 EL KEMMA_Binding Theory 24

Thank you