Syntax and Semantics of Bound Variable Anaphora in Quirky Binding

Authors

  • Namkil Kang

    College of Management and Hotel, Far East University, Chungbuk 27737, Republic of Korea

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i10.11140
Received: 18 July 2025 | Revised: 28 July 2025 | Accepted: 27 August 2025 | Published Online: 11 October 2025

Abstract

This paper demonstrates that the Korean reflexives caki  'self'  and caki-casin 'self-self' exhibit distinct semantic behaviors across eight analytical contexts, which can be systematically explained by LF (Logical Form) movement of the relevant quantificational phrases (QPs). Crucially, caki is interpreted via intended coreference, relying on contextual cues to link with its antecedent, whereas caki-casin is strictly anaphoric, bound to a syntactically accessible antecedent. Semantically, caki acts as a free variable, allowing flexible reference depending on context, while caki-casin is tightly bound to a specific linguistic antecedent. This difference extends to variable binding: caki induces bound-variable readings only in non-local contexts, whereas caki-casin supports bound-variable interpretations in both local and non-local domains. They also differ in semantic interpretations: caki permits both covariant and invariant readings, reflecting interpretive flexibility, while caki-casin allows only covariant readings, indicating a more rigid interaction with quantificational structures. Diagnostic tests reinforce this asymmetry. The even test shows distinct presuppositional effects for each reflexive, highlighting their semantic divergence. The only test reveals different truth-conditional outcomes when a quantificational NP headed by only  serves as an antecedent, supporting their non-equivalence. Regarding thought attribution, caki typically induces direct thought interpretations, aligning with the subject's internal perspective, while caki-casin favors indirect thought, implying mediated or reported perspective. Finally, caki can carry its own reference in discourse, functioning autonomously, whereas caki-casin requires anchoring to an explicit antecedent. This further underscores their semantic non-parallelism.

Keywords:

Quirky Binding; Bound Variable Anaphora; Semantics; Syntax; Bound Variable; Free Variable

References

[1] Brown, K., 2006. Encyclopaedia of language and linguistics, 2nd ed. Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

[2] Büring, D., 2005. Binding Theory, 1st ed. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511802669

[3] Chomsky, N., 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. DE GRUYTER MOUTON: Berlin, Germany. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110884166

[4] Chomsky, N., 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

[5] Cohen, D., Zribi-Hertz, A., 2014. Reflexives and Reflexivity. In: Linguistics. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK. pp. 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0169

[6] Frank, R., Petty, J., 2020. Sequence-to-Sequence Networks Learn the Meaning of Reflexive Anaphora. arXiv preprint. arXiv: 2011.00682. DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2011.00682

[7] Gelderen, E. van., 2011. Anaphora and language design. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.

[8] Grimshaw, J., 1982. On Romance reflexive clitics and argument structure. In: Argument structure. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA. pp. 29–45.

[9] Grimshaw, J., 1990. Mental representation: The case of reflexivity. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA.

[10] Grimshaw, J., Rosen, S.T., 1990. Obeying the Binding Theory. In: Frazier, L., De Villiers, J. (Eds.). Language Processing and Language Acquisition, Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics. Springer: Dordrecht, Netherlands. pp. 357–367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3808-6_15

[11] Hestvik, A., 1991. LF movement and binding domains in reflexives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. 9(2), 241–272.

[12] Hestvik, A., 1995. Reflexives and ellipsis. Natural Language Semantics. 3(2), 211–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01249838

[13] Higginbotham, J., 1989b. Reference and Control. Rivista di Linguistica. 1(2), 301–326.

[14] Higginbotham, J., 1992. Anaphoric Reference and Common Reference. ms. MIT, Cambridge.

[15] Higginbotham, J., 1999. Anaphora and First Person. University of Oxford: Oxford, UK.

[16] König, E., Gast, V. (Eds.), 2008. Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199147

[17] Lidz, J., 2001. The Argument Structure of Verbal Reflexives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. 19(2), 311–353. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010676623092

[18] Maling, J., 1984. Non-clause-bounded reflexives in modern Icelandic. Linguistics and Philosophy. 7(3), 211–241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00627706

[19] Pollard, C., Sag, I.A., 1992. Anaphors in English and the scope of binding theory. Linguistic Inquiry. 23(2), 261–303. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238672214_Anaphors_in_English_and_the_Scope_of_Binding_Theory (cited 20 June 2025).

[20] Reinhart, T., 1983. Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation, 1st ed. Routledge: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315536965

[21] Reinhart, T., Reuland, E.J., 1993. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry. 24, 657–720. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228560302_Reflexivity (cited 20 June 2025).

[22] Reuland, E., 2000. ANAPHORS, LOGOPHORS, AND BINDING. In: Syntax and Semantics. Emerald Group Publishing: Bingley, UK. pp. 343–370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S0092-4563(2000)0000033013

[23] Von Roncador, M., 1992. Types of Logophoric Marking in African Languages. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics. 13(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/jall.1992.13.2.163

[24] Van Gelderen, E., 2000. A History of English Reflexive Pronouns: Person, Self, and Interpretability, Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.39

[25] Ross, J.R., 1967. The Grammar of English Pronominalization. In: To Honor Roman Jakobson. Mouton & Co: The Hague, The Netherlands.

[26] Sag, I.A., 1976. Deletion and Logical Form [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA. Available from: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/16401 (cited 20 June 2025).

Downloads

How to Cite

Kang, N. (2025). Syntax and Semantics of Bound Variable Anaphora in Quirky Binding. Forum for Linguistic Studies, 7(10), 993–1003. https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i10.11140

Issue

Vol. 7 , Iss. 10 (October 2025)

Article Type

Article

License

Copyright © 2025 Namkil Kang

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.