Volume 45, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper presents an in-depth investigation of the binding strategies in Kokborok and we will look more specifically how this sheds light on the theories of reflexivization. Kokborok, a Tibeto-Burman language spoken in Tripura, a state in the North-East of India, has two reflexives: ‘self self’ and ‘self self’. The form ‘self self’ conforms to Principle A of classic Binding Theory, blocking long-distance binding, but this does not hold true for allowing non-local binding. It is a well-established fact that some reflexives allow non-local binding, but it is generally assumed that this phenomenon is limited to a certain type of reflexive, morpho-syntactically ‘simple reflexives.’ The so-called ‘complex reflexives’ generally bar non-local binding, and the Kokborok reflexive seems an exception to that. This paper explores the uniqueness involved in the nature of anaphoric binding in Kokborok.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Baker, Mark C.
    1988Incorporation. A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Battistella, Edward
    1987 Chinese reflexivization. Proceedings of the Second Harbin Conference on Generative Grammar. Harbin: Heilongjiang University.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. 1989 Chinese reflexivization: A movement to INFL approach. Linguistics27(6). 987–1012. 10.1515/ling.1989.27.6.987
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1989.27.6.987 [Google Scholar]
  4. Charnavel, Isabelle, Peter Cole, Gabriella Hermon & C-T. James Huang
    2017 Long distance anaphor: Syntax and discourse. InMartin Everaert & Henk C. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, V. IV, 2nd edn., 2321–2402. Hoboken: Blackwell Publishing. 10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom074
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom074 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chomsky, Noam
    1981Lectures on government & binding. Holland: Foris Publication.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Cole, Peter, & Li-May Sung
    1994 Head movement and long-distance reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry25. 355–385.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Cole, Peter, Gabriella Hermon & James, Huang C.-T.
    (eds.) 2001Long distance reflexives (Syntax and Semantics 33). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Davison, Alice
    2000 Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Hindi. InBarbara Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair & Kārumūri. V. Subbārāo (eds.), Lexical anaphors and pronouns in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology, 397–470. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2001 Long-distance anaphors in Hindi/Urdu: Syntactic and semantic issues. InPeter Cole, Gabriella Hermon, & James Huang, C.-T. (eds.), Long distance reflexives (Syntax and Semantics 33), 47–82. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Everaert, Martin
    1986The syntax of reflexivization. Dordrecht: Foris. 10.1515/9783110250510
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110250510 [Google Scholar]
  11. 2008 Domain restrictions on reciprocal interpretation. InEkkehard König & Volker Gast (eds.), Reciprocals and reflexives. Theoretical and typological explorations, 557–576. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Everaert, Martin, Kārumūri V. Subbārāo & Mataina Wichamdinbo
    2014 Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Liangmai. Lingua Posnaniensis55(2). 41–47. 10.2478/linpo‑2013‑0012
    https://doi.org/10.2478/linpo-2013-0012 [Google Scholar]
  13. Forker, Diana
    2014 The grammar of knowledge in Hinuq. InAlexandra Y. Aikhenvald & Robert W. Dixon (eds.), The grammar of knowledge, 1–51. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0002
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701316.003.0002 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gurtu, Madhu
    1992Anaphoric relations in Hindi and English. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hellan, Lars
    1986 On anaphora and predication in Norwegian. InHellan & Koch Christensen (eds.), Topics in Scandinavian syntax, 103–124. Dordrecht: Reidel. 10.1007/978‑94‑009‑4572‑2_6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4572-2_6 [Google Scholar]
  16. Inkelas, Sharon & Cherl Zoll
    2005Reduplication: Doubling in morphology (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 106). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511627712
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627712 [Google Scholar]
  17. Jacquesson, François
    2008A Kokborok grammar: Agartala dialect. Agartala: Kokborok Tei Hukumu Mission.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Jayaseelan, Karattuparambil A.
    1997 Anaphors as pronouns. Studia Linguistica51. 186–234. 10.1111/1467‑9582.00012
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9582.00012 [Google Scholar]
  19. Koster, Jan & Eric Reuland
    1991Long distance anaphora. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511627835
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627835 [Google Scholar]
  20. König, Ekkehard & Peter Siemund
    2000 Intensifiers and reflexives: A typological perspective. InFrajzyngier, Zygmunt & Tracy S. Curl (eds.), Reflexives: Forms and functions (Typological Studies in Language 40), 41–74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.40.03kon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.40.03kon [Google Scholar]
  21. Lalitha Murthy, Balemarthy & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo
    2000 Pronouns and lexical anaphors in Mizo. InBarbara Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo (eds.), Lexical anaphors and pronouns in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology, 777–840. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110818888.777
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110818888.777 [Google Scholar]
  22. Lee, Gunsoo
    2001 A minimalist account of long-distance anaphor kucasin. Studies in Generative Grammar11(2). 383–404.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Liu, Yingtong
    2016 Chinese zi: Linking reflexivization and binding. Utrecht: Utrecht institute of Linguistics OTS, Utrecht University, MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Lust, Barbara, Kashi Wali, James. W. Gair & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo
    (eds.) 2000Lexical reflexives in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110818888
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110818888 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lyutikova, Ekaterina
    2000 Reflexives and emphasis in Tsaxur. InFrajzyngier, Zygmunt & Tracy. S. Curl (eds.), Reflexives: Forms and functions (Typological Studies in Language 40), 227–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.40.09lyu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.40.09lyu [Google Scholar]
  26. Pica, Pierre
    1987 On the nature of the reflexivization cycle. InJoyce McDunough & Bernadette Plunkett (eds.), Proceedings of NELS17, 483–499. Amherst: GLSA Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Reuland, Eric
    2011Anaphora and language design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2017a Why is reflexivity so special? Understanding the world of reflexives. Studia Linguistica71. 12–59. 10.1111/stul.12070
    https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12070 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2017b Long-distance binding in Germanic languages. In: Martin Everaert & Henk C. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, Vol.IV, 2nd edn, 2403–2433. Holboken: John Wiley. 10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom039
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom039 [Google Scholar]
  30. Reuland, Eric, Sally Chi Ho Wong & Martin Everaert
    2019 How the complexity of Mandarin zi-ji simplifies the grammar. Linguistic Inquiry early access: doi:  10.1162/ling_a_00355. 1–24.
    https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00355 [Google Scholar]
  31. Sarju Devi, T. & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo
    2002 Reduplication and case copying: The case of lexical anaphors in Manipuri and Telugu. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area25(2; Fall). 47–72.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Schadler, Dagmar
    2014Reflexivity: Licensing or enforcing. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Sengupta, Gautam
    2000 Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Bangla. InBarbara Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo (eds.), Lexical anaphors and pronouns in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology, 277–332. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110818888.277
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110818888.277 [Google Scholar]
  34. Singh, Rajendra
    2005 Reduplication in modern Hindi and Theory of Reduplication. InBossong Georg, Comrie Bernard & Matras Yaron (eds.), Studies on reduplication, 263–281. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Stolz, Thomas
    2009 Total reduplication: syndetic vs asyndetic patterns in Europe. Grazer Linguistische Studien71. 99–113.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Subbārāo, Kārumūri V.
    2012South Asian languages: A syntactic typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139003575
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139003575 [Google Scholar]
  37. Subbārāo, Kārumūri V. S. Malhotra & S. Barua
    2010 Aspects of Kokborok syntax. Interdiciplinary Journal of Linguistics3. 1–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Wali, Kashi
    2000 Lexical reflexives and pronouns in Marathi. InBarbara Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo (eds.), Lexical anaphors and pronouns in selected South Asian languages: A principled typology, 513–574. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Wali, Kashi & Kārumūri V. Subbārāo
    1991 On pronominal classification: Evidence from Marathi and Telugu. Linguistics29. 1093–1110. 10.1515/ling.1991.29.6.1093
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1991.29.6.1093 [Google Scholar]
  40. Wong, Sally Chi Ho
    2017 Investigating Mandarin Chinese zi-V reflexive verbs. Working paper. Utrecht institute of Linguistics OTS.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Yang, Dong-Whee
    1983 The extended binding theory of anaphors. Language Research19. 169–192.
    [Google Scholar]
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error