Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax
- Cambridge Handbooks In Language And Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1The Comparative Syntactic Enterprise
- Part IComparative Syntax: Theory, Methodology, and Data Collection
- Part IIComparative Syntax: Building Blocks and Combinatorial Properties
- 10Words and Features
- 11Pronouns
- 12Functional Architecture of Nominal Phrases
- 13Functional Architecture of Adjectival Phrases
- 14Functional Architecture of Prepositional Phrases
- 15Analyzing Tenselessness
- 16Voice
- 17Coordination
- 18Clause Types
- Part IIIComparative Syntax: Dependency Relations and Dependency Marking
- Part IVComparative Syntax: Interfaces
- Index
- References
11 - Pronouns
Structure, Binding, and Classification
from Part II - Comparative Syntax: Building Blocks and Combinatorial Properties
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 January 2026
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax
- Cambridge Handbooks In Language And Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Acknowledgments
- 1The Comparative Syntactic Enterprise
- Part IComparative Syntax: Theory, Methodology, and Data Collection
- Part IIComparative Syntax: Building Blocks and Combinatorial Properties
- 10Words and Features
- 11Pronouns
- 12Functional Architecture of Nominal Phrases
- 13Functional Architecture of Adjectival Phrases
- 14Functional Architecture of Prepositional Phrases
- 15Analyzing Tenselessness
- 16Voice
- 17Coordination
- 18Clause Types
- Part IIIComparative Syntax: Dependency Relations and Dependency Marking
- Part IVComparative Syntax: Interfaces
- Index
- References
Summary
In this chapter we offer a brief history of generative views on pronouns, focusing on their (coreference) possibilities and their internal syntax. We focus on two types of variation that are responsible for many of the differences among pronominal systems in the world’s languages. The first concerns the syntactic category of the pronoun within a general theory of nominal extended projection; the second concerns the presence or absence of a lexical noun within the pronoun. Based on recent developments regarding the syntactic representation of speaker and addressee, we also offer a novel proposal for Japanese pronouns, which have thus far resisted straightforward analysis. This analysis is then extended to formal pronouns in languages like French and German.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax , pp. 331 - 358Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Abney, S. P. 1987. The English Noun Phrase in Its Sentential Aspect. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Ackema, P., and Neeleman, A.. 2018. Features of Person: From the Inventory of Persons to Their Morphological Realization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brame, M. 1982. The head-selector theory of lexical specifications and the nonexistence of coarse categories. Linguistic Analysis 8(4): 321–325.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, A., and Starke, M.. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency. In van Riemsdijk, H. (ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1970. Remarks on nominalization. In Jacobs, R. A. and Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 184–221. Waltham, MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
Compton, R. 2022. On the structure of personal pronouns in Inuktut. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 22(3): 194–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, R. 1979. The interpretation of pronouns. In Heny, F. and Schnelle, H. (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 10: Selections from the Third Groningen Round Table, 61–92. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dahlstrom, A. 1988. Independent pronouns in Fox. In Shipley, W. (ed.), In Honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics, 165–194. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Déchaine, R.-M. 1999. What Algonquian morphology is really like: Hockett revisited. In Bar-El, L., Déchaine, R.-M., and Reinholtz, C. (eds.), MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 17: Papers from the Workshop on Structure and Constituency in Native American Languages, 25–72. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Déchaine, R.-M., and Wiltschko, M.. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33(3): 409–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbourne, P. 2001. E-type anaphora as NP-deletion. Natural Language Semantics 9(3): 241–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elbourne, P. 2005. On the acquisition of Principle B. Linguistic Inquiry 36(3): 333–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galloway, B. 1993. A Grammar of Upriver Halkomelem. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Greenberg, J. H. (ed.), Universals of Language, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. 2000. Locality and extended projection. In Coopmans, P., Everaert, M., and Grimshaw, J. (eds.), Lexical Specification and Insertion, 115–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmbrecht, J. 2013. Politeness distinctions in pronouns. In Dryer, M. S. and Haspelmath, M. (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Ch. 45. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/chapter/45.Google Scholar
Hoji, H. 1990. On the so-called overt pronouns in Japanese and Korean. In Baek, E.-J. (ed.), Papers from the Seventh International Conference on Korean Linguistics, 61–78. Osaka: International Circle of Korean Linguistics & Osaka University of Economics and Law.Google Scholar
Hoji, H. 1991. Kare. In Georgopoulos, C. J. and Ishihara, R. (eds.), Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language: Essays in Honor of S.-Y. Kuroda, 287–304. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, C.-T. J. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15(4): 531–574.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. 1977. X-bar Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kaiser, S., Ichikawa, Y., Kobayashi, N., and Yamamoto, H.. 2013. Japanese: A Comprehensive Grammar, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitagawa, C. 1981. Anaphora in Japanese: Kare and zibun. In Farmer, A. K. and Kitagawa, C. (eds.), Coyote Papers 2: Proceedings of the Arizona Conference on Japanese Linguistics: The Formal Grammar Sessions, 61–75. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Linguistics Circle. https://repository.arizona.edu/handle/10150/229535.Google Scholar
Kitagawa, C., and Lehrer, A.. 1990. Impersonal uses of personal pronouns. Journal of Pragmatics 14(5): 739–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuroda, S.-Y. 1965. Generative Grammatical Studies in the Japanese Language. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Lees, R. B., and Klima, E. S.. 1963. Rules for English pronominalization. Language 39(1): 17–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lowenstamm, J. 2008. On little n,√, and types of nouns. In Hartmann, J., Hegedüs, V., and van Riemsdijk, H. (eds.), Sounds of Silence: Empty Elements in Syntax and Phonology, 105–144. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
McDonald, B. 2021. The Interactional Structure of Nominals: An Investigation of Paranouns. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Calgary.Google Scholar
Neeleman, A., and Szendrői, K.. 2007. Radical Pro Drop and the morphology of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 38(4): 671–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noguchi, T. 1997. Two types of pronouns and variable binding. Language 73(4): 770–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Obana, Y. 2003. The use of kare/kanojo in Japanese society today. New Zealand Journal of Asian Studies 5(1): 139–155.Google Scholar
Paul, I, and Travis, L. 2022. Pronominal deficiency: A view from Malagasy. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 67(3): 353–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Picallo, C. 1991. Nominals and nominalizations in Catalan. Probus 3(3): 279–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plank, F. n.d. Rara & Universals Archive. Das grammatische Raritätenkabinett & The Universals Archive. https://typo.uni-konstanz.de/rara/.Google Scholar
Postal, P. 1969. On so-called “pronouns” in English. In Reibel, D. A. and Schane, S. (eds.), Modern Studies in English: Readings in Transformational Grammar, 201–224. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Reinhart, T. 1976. The Syntactic Domain of Anaphora. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. 1991. Two functional categories in noun phrases: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Rothstein, S. (ed.), Perspectives on Phrase Structure: Heads and Licensing [Syntax and Semantics 26], 37–62. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, E. 1995. On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 13(3): 405–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, E, and Wiltschko, M. 2019a. Nominal speech act structure: Evidence from the structural deficiency of impersonal pronouns. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 64(4): 709–729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, E, and Wiltschko, M. 2019b. The syntax of formality: Universals and variation. In Proceedings of the 2019 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association. https://cla-acl.ca/pdfs/actes-2019/Ritter-Wiltschko-CLA-2019.pdf.Google Scholar
Ross, J. R. 1970. On declarative sentences. In Jacobs, R. A. and Rosenbaum, P. S. (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar, 222–277. Waltham MA: Ginn.Google Scholar
Royer, J. 2022. Decomposing definiteness: Evidence from Chuj. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 67(3): 383–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, M., and Hoji, H.. 1983. Weak crossover and move α in Japanese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 1(2): 245–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sichel, I. 2000. Demonstrative pronouns, binding theory, and identity. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 7(1): Article 22. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol7/iss1/22.Google Scholar
Speas, M., and Tenny, C.. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Di Sciullio, A. M. (ed.), Asymmetry in Grammar, 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Szabolcsi, A. 1987. Functional categories in the noun phrase. In Kenesei, I. (ed.), Approaches to Hungarian 2, 167–190. Szeged: JATE.Google Scholar
Tomioka, S. 2003. The semantics of Japanese null pronouns and its cross-linguistic implications. In Schwabe, K. and Winkler, S. (eds.), The Interfaces: Deriving and Interpreting Omitted Structures, 321–339. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Travis, L. 1984. Parameters and Effects of Word Order Variation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Wiltschko, M. 1998a. On the syntax and semantics of (relative) pronouns and determiners. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2(2): 143–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, M. 1998b. On the internal and external syntax of independent pronouns in Halq’eméylem. In Papers for the 33rd International Conference on Salish and Neighboring Languages, 428–447. Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Wiltschko, M. 2002. The syntax of pronouns: Evidence from Halkomelem Salish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(1): 157–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, M. 2021. The Grammar of Interactional Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yamada, A. 2019. The Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics of Japanese Addressee-Honorific Markers. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
Yashima, J. 2015. On the apparent unbindability of overt third-person pronouns in Japanese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33(4): 1421–1438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zribi-Hertz, A., and Mbolatianavalona, L.. 1999. Towards a modular theory of linguistic deficiency: Evidence from Malagasy personal pronouns. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17(1): 161–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.2 AAA
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter complies with version 2.2 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), offering more comprehensive accessibility measures for a broad range
of users and attains the highest
(AAA)
level of WCAG compliance, optimising the user experience by meeting the most extensive
accessibility guidelines.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.