Search

This article argues that the relegation of the binding theory to the C-I interface (LF) is theoretically undesirable and empirically unwarranted. Recent minimalist research has sought to eliminate the binding theory from UG by reducing its conditions to narrow-syntactic operations ( Hornstein 2000, 2006 ; Reuland 2001, 2006 ; Kayne 2002 ; Zwart 2002, 2006 ; Hicks 2006 ). This approach remains controversial since the canonical minimalist binding theory ( Chomsky 1993 ; Chomsky & Lasnik 1993 ) views the binding conditions as interpretive rules applying at LF, supported by evidence that condition A interacts with other interpretive phenomena assumed to be determined at LF ( Lebeaux 1998 ; Fox & Nissenbaum 2004 ). While the interaction of anaphor binding and scope relations in particular is not disputed, I show that it is attributable to factors outside the binding theory, namely the requirement that variables (including anaphors) must be c-commanded by their binders at LF. Deprived of its strongest empirical argument, the LF binding theory can then be picked apart. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]