A reciprocal pronoun is a pronoun that indicates a reciprocal relationship. A reciprocal pronoun can be used for one of the participants of a reciprocal construction, i.e. a clause in which two participants are in a mutual relationship. The reciprocal pronouns of English are one another and each other, and they form the category of anaphors along with reflexive pronouns (myself, yourselves, themselves, etc.).
Defining properties
Semantics of reciprocal relation Reflexive pronouns are used similarly to reciprocal pronouns in the sense that they typically refer back to the subject of the sentence.
(1) John and Mary like themselves. (2) John and Mary like each other.
The main difference between reflexives, as in example (1), and reciprocal pronouns, as in example (2), is that reflexives are used when the subject acts upon itself, while reciprocals are used when members of a group perform the same action relative to one another. Reciprocal pronouns exist in many languages. They are associated with plural noun phrases and indicate a reciprocal relationship between the members of the plural noun phrase. This means that some member (x) of the plural subject is acting on another member (y) of the subject, and that member (y) is also acting on (x), and that both x and y are members of the group denoted by the antecedent subject. Below are examples of reciprocal pronouns and how their relationship to their antecedents contrasts to cases of reflexive pronoun relationships, and regular transitive relationships, and how they behave in relation to direct object pronouns in the same situation. Let R denote a Relation, and let the variables (for example, (x, y) ) stand for the arguments introduced by R.
Therefore, we can look at a reciprocal relationship using this notation, using the verb see as the relation: see(Anne, Betty) and see(Betty, Anne).
Syntax of reciprocals as anaphors Within the theory of generative grammar, and within phrase-structure grammar, binding theory explains how anaphors share a relationship with their referents. Binding Principle A of this theory states:
X binds Y if and only if X c-commands Y, and X and Y are coindexed, Anaphors must be locally bound within the binding domain of the clause containing the DP determiner phrase. In the traditional binding theory, the category of anaphor includes both reflexive and reciprocal pronouns of English, which is a problem, since they are distributed differently. The differences in the distribution of reflexives and reciprocals are illustrated below using X-bar theory tree diagrams.
Distribution of reciprocals: Lebeaux (1983) Although both reciprocal and reflexive pronouns are classified as anaphors, they differ in distribution. For example, reciprocal pronouns can appear in the subject position of noun phrases, whereas reflexives cannot.
(3) a. John and Mary like each other's parents. b. *John and Mary like themselves' parents.
(4) a. All of the students would know if each other had the answers. b. *All of the students would know if themselves had the answers.
In example (4b) with the reflexive anaphor, the embedded clause's complementizer phrase (CP) beginning with the word "if", cannot introduce a subject noun phrase. Although in many cases, either a reflexive or a reciprocal pronoun could appear in the same structural position, in some cases, the asymmetry occurs when a reciprocal may be bound to its antecedent, but a reflexive may not. The following examples from Lebeaux (1983) show that in some sentences, either type of anaphor could be used:
(5) a. John and Mary like themselves. b. John and Mary like each other.
Both the reflexive pronoun in (5a) and the reciprocal pronoun in (5b) can be locally bound (its antecedent is in the same clause, the clause is the binding domain), which would follow binding theory's binding principle A: that an anaphor must be bound in its binding domain). A case in which we can see the differences in the distribution of reflexive and reciprocal pronouns is in the subject position of embedded clauses: reflexives cannot occur in this position (6a), but reciprocals can (6b).
(6) a. *John and Mary think that themselves will win. b. John and Mary think that each other will win.
As we can see in the X-bar theory tree diagram of (6b), the reciprocal pronoun is in the subject position of the embedded clause, which is introduced by complementizer "that". It is not possible for a reflexive pronoun to occur in this position as shown by the ungrammaticality of (6a). In this case, the reciprocal pronoun is not necessarily the ideal construction, but the reflexive is not a possible grammatical sentence. This suggests that while reflexives require a proper binder, reciprocals may appear in positions that are not governed this way, and can even be in a different clause than the antecedent. The differences can be summarized as follows:
Reciprocals are subject to binding theory; Reflexives are subject to binding theory, and must be properly governed.
Variation in the realization of reciprocals Syntactically, reciprocals can be realized as free or bound pronouns, as NP arguments or as verbal affixes.
Free pronoun
Person-marked free pronoun These have a similar pattern to personal pronouns, as they are morphemes independent from the verb (and not clitics, or inflection markers). They possess person features: the reciprocal pronoun surfaces differently when its antecedent is first-, second- or third-person. These are common in the Chadic language Hausa:
Person-unmarked free pronoun Person-unmarked free pronouns occur in languages that do not have distinct forms for all persons. This is commonly found in German. Unlike person-marked pronouns, person-unmarked free pronouns cannot occur in contexts where the pronoun is modifying the noun (i.e. each other's parents), and in contexts where there is a non-subject antecedent (i.e. introduced them to one another).
Bound pronoun
Pronominal affix Reciprocal pronouns can be affixed to either the verb, or to the auxiliary base, as in Warlpiri:
… excerpt ends here. Continue reading the full article.
