reflexives in subject position

[Balthasar Bickel]

Dan Everett wrote:
> So my question, then, is one you might expect. What is the total set of
> arguments you have for this actually being the subject in this case? I
> am not yet convinced that it is.
>
> Moreover, as George Lakoff has shown, it is easy to mistake a
> grammatical relation, thinking that, to take George's example, 'My own
> father...' is a subject reflexive, when in fact it isn't.
>
> Your example looks good, but I think more argumentation is in order.
>
> A different kind of question is twofold: (i) evidence for clearly
> nominative reflexives (as *'heself', a missing English form) and (ii)
> evidence that if such exist they are in subject position. Chomsky
> predicts, for example, that these not exist. In HPSG the absence of
> 'nominative reflexives' would be an accidental gap. This is a clear
> difference between these theories (and others fall along these lines
> too) so clear cases would be most welcome and valuable.

Well, there IS a nominative form ('aaphu') in the example quoted in my
last posting ('aaphu Raamlaaii barbaad garcha'). And note, it's
demonstrably a nominative: in Nepali, the nominative case form also
covers objects, but only if their reference is inanimate; the reference
of 'aaphu' is animate in the example. Therefore, it can't be an
object. So, together with the ergative/nominative alternation, this is
pretty good coding evidence that 'aaphu' is in subject function. As for
behavioral subject properties, I am currently running some tests.

-- Balthasar.



__________________________________________

Balthasar Bickel
University of California at Berkeley
Department of Slavic Languages
6303 Dwinelle Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-2979
Phone:    +1-510-848 4875 (home)
Fax:      +1-510-642 6220 (office)
E-Mail:   bickel at socrates.berkeley.edu
Web Site: socrates.berkeley.edu/~bickel
__________________________________________