Binding (linguistics)
Encyclopedia
In linguistics
, binding theory is any of a broad class of theories dealing with the distribution of pronominal
and anaphoric
elements. The idea that there should be a specialised, coherent theory dealing with this particular set of phenomena originated in work in transformational grammar
in the 1970s. This work culminated in government and binding theory
(a general theory of innate linguistic structure
) whose version of the binding theory is still considered a reference point, though it is no longer current. Virtually all generative syntactic theories (for example, HPSG and LFG
) now have a "binding theory" subcomponent.
) are determined by the values of these features, either plus or minus. Thus, a noun that is [-anaphor, -pronominal] is a referential-expression R-expr, such as a common noun or proper name
. One that is [-anaphor, +pronominal] is a pronoun, such as English he or they. [+anaphor, -pronominal] is a reflexive, such as himself or themselves.
The actual requirements on where a type of noun can occur are given in three conditions A, B, and C (also referred to as principles).
Condition A states that an anaphor (reflexive) must have a local ("nearby") antecedent
(expression that refers to the same entity). Thus, John washed himself obeys Condition A: the antecedent of himself, which is John, is nearby, and both refer to the person "John". In contrast, *John asked Mary to wash himself is unacceptable, because the reflexive and its antecedent are too far away from each other.
Condition B states that a pronoun can have an antecedent, as long as the antecedent is not local (i.e. "far away") or doesn't c-command
the pronoun. Thus, John asked Mary to wash him obeys Condition B: John is the antecedent of him, and him is sufficiently far away; on the other hand, *John washed him, where John is intended to be the antecedent of him, is unacceptable.
Condition C states that an R-expression cannot have an antecedent that c-command
s it. Thus, *He asked Mary to wash John, with the interpretation that He is the antecedent of John, is unacceptable.
Operator-variable binding is the formal mechanism employed to explain the syntax of interrogatives (questions), topicalization, as well as relative clauses, and other related language constructions.
In essence, operator-variable binding provides a way for an individual entity (or entities) to be picked out from a set of entities. Since this is a very abstract definition, an illustration will be helpful. Look at the two examples below. The first is a statement, and the second is a question derived from the statement.
(1) Smoltz hit Rodriguez with the baseball.
(2) Whom did Smoltz hit [e] with the baseball?
Notice in the question (2), whom, which corresponds to the object of the verb hit, appears at the left of the sentence, not in the position marked [e], which is where the object appears in the statement.
The position marked by [e] is linked to, (or bound by), the question word whom. Whom is the operator, denoting a set of individuals, and the [e] spot is the variable, while the range of the operator is, in essence, limited to those people whom Smoltz might have hit (with the baseball). Notice that, since (2) is a question, it would not be quite correct to say that whom and Rodriguez refer to the same thing, since it is also possible that John Smoltz hit other people (with the baseball) as well.
The names A-binding and A'-binding come from the idea of A-levels and A'-levels, which distinguish arguments (required elements, such as subjects, objects, etc.) from non-arguments, such as elements which may have been arguments, but have moved "beyond" to become something else in addition, such as a question word; also elements which are peripheral, such as certain kinds of modifiers.
Thus, in the example (1) above, Smoltz and Rodriguez are A-level elements, since they are arguments of the verb hit (hit requires both someone/something that does the hitting, and someone/something that was hit. A'-level elements are question word whom in (2), as well as with the baseball. Whom was once an argument of hit, but has moved to the left to satisfy a rule in English that (more-or-less) requires question words to move to the left. The element with the baseball is not an argument of anything, since removing it would still result in a grammatical sentence (in the sense of syntactic theory), whereas removing either Smoltz or Rodriguez would not.
and semantic
binding (which are tightly connected):
A node α syntactically binds a node β if
βn semantically binds αm if the sister of βn is the largest subtree of γ in which αm is semantically free, where
Linguistics
Linguistics is the scientific study of human language. Linguistics can be broadly broken into three categories or subfields of study: language form, language meaning, and language in context....
, binding theory is any of a broad class of theories dealing with the distribution of pronominal
Pronominal
Pronominal can be used either to describe something related to a pronoun or to mean a phrase that acts as a pronoun in the context of nominal. An example of the second case is, "I want that kind". The phrase "that kind" stands in for a noun phrase, or nominal, that can be deduced from context, and...
and anaphoric
Anaphora (linguistics)
In linguistics, anaphora is an instance of an expression referring to another. Usually, an anaphoric expression is represented by a pro-form or some other kind of deictic--for instance, a pronoun referring to its antecedent...
elements. The idea that there should be a specialised, coherent theory dealing with this particular set of phenomena originated in work in transformational grammar
Transformational grammar
In linguistics, a transformational grammar or transformational-generative grammar is a generative grammar, especially of a natural language, that has been developed in the Chomskyan tradition of phrase structure grammars...
in the 1970s. This work culminated in government and binding theory
Government and binding theory
Government and binding is a theory of syntax and a phrase structure grammar in the tradition of transformational grammar developed principally by Noam Chomsky in the 1980s...
(a general theory of innate linguistic structure
Universal grammar
Universal grammar is a theory in linguistics that suggests that there are properties that all possible natural human languages have.Usually credited to Noam Chomsky, the theory suggests that some rules of grammar are hard-wired into the brain, and manifest themselves without being taught...
) whose version of the binding theory is still considered a reference point, though it is no longer current. Virtually all generative syntactic theories (for example, HPSG and LFG
Lexical functional grammar
Lexical functional grammar is a grammar framework in theoretical linguistics, a variety of generative grammar. It is a type of phrase structure grammar, as opposed to a dependency grammar. The development of the theory was initiated by Joan Bresnan and Ronald Kaplan in the 1970s, in reaction to...
) now have a "binding theory" subcomponent.
Distribution of nominals under binding theory
In the tradition of generative syntax, it is argued that all kinds of nouns can be classified by the combination of two features, [anaphor] and [pronominal], features which are binary. The binding characteristics of a noun (or its corresponding empty categoryEmpty category
In linguistics, in the study of syntax, an empty category is a nominal element which does not have any phonological content and is therefore unpronounced; they may also be referred to as covert nouns, in contrast to overt nouns which are pronounced. There are four types of empty category:...
) are determined by the values of these features, either plus or minus. Thus, a noun that is [-anaphor, -pronominal] is a referential-expression R-expr, such as a common noun or proper name
Proper name
"A proper name [is] a word that answers the purpose of showing what thing it is that we are talking about" writes John Stuart Mill in A System of Logic , "but not of telling anything about it"...
. One that is [-anaphor, +pronominal] is a pronoun, such as English he or they. [+anaphor, -pronominal] is a reflexive, such as himself or themselves.
The actual requirements on where a type of noun can occur are given in three conditions A, B, and C (also referred to as principles).
Condition A states that an anaphor (reflexive) must have a local ("nearby") antecedent
Antecedent (grammar)
In grammar, an antecedent is a noun, noun phrase, or clause to which an anaphor refers in a coreference. For example, in the passage "I did not see John because he wasn't there", "John" is the antecedent of the anaphor "he"; together "John" and "he" are called a coreference because they both refer...
(expression that refers to the same entity). Thus, John washed himself obeys Condition A: the antecedent of himself, which is John, is nearby, and both refer to the person "John". In contrast, *John asked Mary to wash himself is unacceptable, because the reflexive and its antecedent are too far away from each other.
Condition B states that a pronoun can have an antecedent, as long as the antecedent is not local (i.e. "far away") or doesn't c-command
C-command
In syntax, c-command is a relationship between nodes in parse trees. Originally defined by Tanya Reinhart ,it corresponds to the idea of "siblings and all their descendants" in family trees.-Definition and Example:...
the pronoun. Thus, John asked Mary to wash him obeys Condition B: John is the antecedent of him, and him is sufficiently far away; on the other hand, *John washed him, where John is intended to be the antecedent of him, is unacceptable.
Condition C states that an R-expression cannot have an antecedent that c-command
C-command
In syntax, c-command is a relationship between nodes in parse trees. Originally defined by Tanya Reinhart ,it corresponds to the idea of "siblings and all their descendants" in family trees.-Definition and Example:...
s it. Thus, *He asked Mary to wash John, with the interpretation that He is the antecedent of John, is unacceptable.
Binding of nominals versus operator-variable binding
Generative syntax distinguishes two kinds of binding. The first concerns nouns and the binding conditions discussed above: this is referred to as A-binding. The second concerns binding of another kind, a kind of logical binding known as operator-variable binding, or A'-binding.Operator-variable binding is the formal mechanism employed to explain the syntax of interrogatives (questions), topicalization, as well as relative clauses, and other related language constructions.
In essence, operator-variable binding provides a way for an individual entity (or entities) to be picked out from a set of entities. Since this is a very abstract definition, an illustration will be helpful. Look at the two examples below. The first is a statement, and the second is a question derived from the statement.
(1) Smoltz hit Rodriguez with the baseball.
(2) Whom did Smoltz hit [e] with the baseball?
Notice in the question (2), whom, which corresponds to the object of the verb hit, appears at the left of the sentence, not in the position marked [e], which is where the object appears in the statement.
The position marked by [e] is linked to, (or bound by), the question word whom. Whom is the operator, denoting a set of individuals, and the [e] spot is the variable, while the range of the operator is, in essence, limited to those people whom Smoltz might have hit (with the baseball). Notice that, since (2) is a question, it would not be quite correct to say that whom and Rodriguez refer to the same thing, since it is also possible that John Smoltz hit other people (with the baseball) as well.
The names A-binding and A'-binding come from the idea of A-levels and A'-levels, which distinguish arguments (required elements, such as subjects, objects, etc.) from non-arguments, such as elements which may have been arguments, but have moved "beyond" to become something else in addition, such as a question word; also elements which are peripheral, such as certain kinds of modifiers.
Thus, in the example (1) above, Smoltz and Rodriguez are A-level elements, since they are arguments of the verb hit (hit requires both someone/something that does the hitting, and someone/something that was hit. A'-level elements are question word whom in (2), as well as with the baseball. Whom was once an argument of hit, but has moved to the left to satisfy a rule in English that (more-or-less) requires question words to move to the left. The element with the baseball is not an argument of anything, since removing it would still result in a grammatical sentence (in the sense of syntactic theory), whereas removing either Smoltz or Rodriguez would not.
Syntactic versus semantic binding
Heim and Kratzer (1998) distinguish between syntacticSyntax
In linguistics, syntax is the study of the principles and rules for constructing phrases and sentences in natural languages....
and semantic
Semantics
Semantics is the study of meaning. It focuses on the relation between signifiers, such as words, phrases, signs and symbols, and what they stand for, their denotata....
binding (which are tightly connected):
A node α syntactically binds a node β if
- α and β are co-indexed,
- α c-commandC-commandIn syntax, c-command is a relationship between nodes in parse trees. Originally defined by Tanya Reinhart ,it corresponds to the idea of "siblings and all their descendants" in family trees.-Definition and Example:...
s β, - α is in an A-position, and
- α does not c-command any other node which is also co-indexed with β, c-commands β, and is in an A-position (p. 261).
βn semantically binds αm if the sister of βn is the largest subtree of γ in which αm is semantically free, where
- αm is a variable occurrence in a tree γ,
- βn is a variable binder occurrence in γ (p. 262)
See also
- Principles and parametersPrinciples and parametersPrinciples and parameters is a framework within generative linguistics in which the syntax of a natural language is described in accordance with general principles and specific parameters that for particular languages are either turned on or off...
- Empty category principleEmpty category principleIn linguistics, the empty category principle was proposed in Noam Chomsky's syntactic framework of government and binding theory. The ECP is supposed to be a universal syntactic constraint that requires traces to be properly governed....
- ControlControl (linguistics)In linguistics, a control construction is a clause that contains a main clause , the predicate of which has two complements — an embedded clause complement and a nominal complement that acts as the semantic argument of the main clause and of the embedded clause...
- Argument control
- Raising
- TraceTrace (linguistics)In transformational grammar, a trace is an empty category that occupies a position in the syntactic structure. In some theories of syntax, traces are used in the account of constructions such as wh-movement and passive....
- ECM verbECM verbExceptional case-marking is a concept of the government and binding theory of syntax to analyze certain verbs. Verbs in English that have been analyzed as involving exceptional case-marking include believe and prove, as in:...
- Tensed-S ConditionTensed-S ConditionThe Tensed-S condition is a condition proposed in Chomsky which essentially stipulates that certain classes of syntactic transformational rules cannot apply across clause boundaries. The condition is formalised as follows:...