Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-2 of 2
Seth A. Minkoff
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Linguistic Inquiry (2004) 35 (3): 485–494.
Published: 01 July 2004
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Linguistic Inquiry (2000) 31 (4): 583–608.
Published: 01 October 2000
Abstract
View article
PDF
Certain acceptability contrasts attending pronominal and SELF-anaphor binding are not accounted for by previous theories of Principles A and B. These contrasts are produced by “Principle D,” which limits the binding domains of antecedents that are “nonselected,” that is, of antecedents that form arguments of predicates that do not restrict the class of arguments with which these antecedents may acceptably be replaced. Further, assuming that Principle D violations are less unacceptable than Principle B violations and more unacceptable than Principle A violations, Principle D's interactions with Principles A and B account for gradations of unacceptability that cannot be accounted for using the “acceptable/unacceptable” dichotomy posited in most previous works.