Jaume Solà i Pujols - Departament de Filologia Catalana ...

(72) [ DP o [ NP eaftós [ tu ] ] ]
DPGen
the self his
Iatridou (1988) argues that the genitive pronominal inside the reflexive phrase is not an
anaphor itself. Rather it is forced to have a proximate antecedent by being inside a reflexive DP
(which is not bound as such). Suppose this particular device for reflexivity has the following
properties:
- a reflexive DP of this type is not an anaphor from a formal point of view. However, to
be licenced at LF (under Full Interpretation -Chomsky (1988)), it has to inherit the index of its
genitive: then it will be interpreted as reflexive.
- when this reflexive DP is the predicate of a Small Clause, however, this process of
inheritance does not extend to the Small Clause, perhaps because the denotational indexing
relevant for predication percolates earlier than LF.
I think that this could be the basis for explaining the otherwise problematic behavior of
Greek for Anaphoric Copulative constructions. This explanation may be tricky, and obviously a
more accurate study of these kind of reflexives (where the bound element is a genitive) would be
required. On the other hand Basque has a similar type of reflexive:
(73) [ DP [ NP [ bere ] buru ] -a ]
DPGen
'Himself'
his head the
and does not use this reflexive form in Anaphoric Copulative Constructions (it rather uses the
logophoric/emphatic form). I cannot say anything about the issue.
Another potential counterexample is found in Icelandic: unlike in Mainland
Scandinavian, the element used in this construction is not the one used as subject oriented
1