Binding Constraints

The binding constraints we assume are essentially those found in chapter 6.4 of [24]:

In [24] the notion o-command is defined in terms of the SUBCAT list: a referential sign X locally o-commands Y iff X precedes Y on SUBCAT. The general notion o-command then holds between X and Y iff X locally o-commands a Z, and Z dominates Y.

The fact that arguments can be shared in SUBCAT lists raises the question how we should interpret the principles of binding. For example, principle B can be understood at least in two ways:

• A personal pronoun must be locally o-free in all SUBCAT lists it is a member of
• A personal pronoun must be locally o-free in at least one SUBCAT list it is a member of

We show that if the binding constraints are defined with respect to SUBCAT lists then both interpretations give rise to problems. As an alternative we will then use the feature ARG-S introduced in [11] to account for the binding data from Dutch.