David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Most theories of binding in most syntactic frameworks assume that the same notion of surface obliqueness that identi es the subject of a clause is also used for obliqueness conditions on re exive binding For instance in GB Chomsky binding theory is standardly de ned on S structure so that in Nancy can bind herself due to the c commanding con guration that also makes Nancy the subject of the sentence..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
James W. Garson (2001). (Dis)Solving the Binding Problem. Philosophical Psychology 14 (4):381 – 392.
Jan Plate (2007). An Analysis of the Binding Problem. Philosophical Psychology 20 (6):773 – 792.
Robert F. Hadley (2006). Neural Circuits, Matrices, and Conjunctive Binding. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (1):80-80.
Glyn Humphreys (2012). There's Binding and There's Binding, or is There Just Binding? : Neuropsychological Insights From Bálint's Syndrome. In Jeremy M. Wolfe & Lynn C. Robertson (eds.), From Perception to Consciousness: Searching with Anne Treisman. Oxford University Press. 324.
Adam Sennet (2008). The Binding Argument and Pragmatic Enrichment, or, Why Philosophers Care Even More Than Weathermen About 'Raining'. Philosophy Compass 3 (1):135-157.
Jörn Diedrichsen & Eliot Hazeltine (2001). Unifying by Binding: Will Binding Really Bind? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):884-885.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads2 ( #386,730 of 1,413,475 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #155,015 of 1,413,475 )
How can I increase my downloads?