Light and heavy reflexives

Dados Bibliográficos

ID3989765
AutoresM C Smith (0000-0002-2996-0609, autor correspondente), Mark Smith (0000-0002-1048-7786)
Ano2004
Volume42
Fascículo3
Data de publicação2004-01-21
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoLinguistics (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0024-3949 • E-ISSN: 1613-396X
EditoraWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/ling.2004.019
OpenAlexW2093005239
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas6
Referências citadas29

Haiman (1983) has argued that the phonological weight of reflexives within many languages is determined by the type of verb that they are coupled with. Specifically, he has claimed that reflexives which occur with introverted verbs denoting actions which one generally performs upon one's self tend to be phonologically lighter than reflexives which occur with extroverted verbs denoting actions which the subject usually performs towards others. Contra Haiman, Kemmer (1993) has argued that light and heavy reflexive marking is determined by the degree to which the participants in the action denoted by a sentence are distinguishable. The current article defends Haiman against Kemmer's critique but also advances many other criticisms of Haiman's analysis. Thus, it is argued contra Haiman that introversion and extroversion can be properties not only of the actions denoted by verbs but of the actions denoted by sentences also. Furthermore, it is shown contra Haiman that notions of introversion and extroversion can differ across languages. Finally, it is demonstrated that although the distinction between introversion and extroversion can account for more instances of the contrast between light and heavy reflexive marking than envisioned by Haiman, it still fails to explain every such instance. Problems with other theories which draw upon the distinction between introversion and extroversion to motivate the contrast between light and heavy reflexive marking such as Reinhart and Reuland (1993) are also highlighted. Finally, it is shown that theories of reflexivization which do not appeal to the distinction between introversion and extroversion such as Chomsky (1986) or Pollard and Sag (1992) are unable to predict observed patterns of light and heavy reflexive marking. It is concluded that no satisfactory account of the contrast between light and heavy reflexive marking currently exists and that further data pertaining to issues such as diachronic evolution and cross-l

Linguistics · Language and cultural evolution · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation