Obligatory control and local reflexives

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.
This Chapter is currently unavailable for purchase.

Why do locally bound reflexives (LBR) and obligatorily controlled PRO (OC-PRO) <i>only</i> have <i>de se</i> interpretations in the scope of verbs like &#8216;expect&#8217; and &#8216;believe&#8217;, while other pronouns can but need not support such interpretations? We argue that occurrences of LBR and OC-PRO result from <i>copying</i>, which is distinct from <i>co-indexing</i>, and that copying is construed as a special case of co-indexing. Often, this distinction is truth-conditionally irrelevant. Even when a psychological verb lies between coindexed expressions, the resulting sentence can be &#8220;made true&#8221; in many ways, including <i>de se</i> ways. But if the matrix and embedded subjects are copies, this imposes a further constraint that only <i>de se</i> interpretations meet, given available distinctions in thought. On this view, which posits no special pronouns that conspire with an antecedent to create distinctively first-personal meanings, <i>de se</i> interpretations are accommodated with spare theoretical apparatus in syntax and semantics.


This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address