Hendrick, R. 1990. ‘Barriers and Binding in Breton.’, The Syntax of the Modern Celtic Languages. Syntax and Semantics 23, R. Hendrick (éd.), Academic Press. New York, 121-165.
(end of the) introduction: "The purpose of this article is to question whether the proper treatment of binding can be constructed purely in hierarchical terms. I intend to show that the theory summarized in (1a) [binding conditions A, B and C ] must be supplemented in two ways. First, an examination of the distribution of Breton pronouns reveals a left-right asymmetry that requires a revision of the binding theory in (1a). I argue, in much the same spirit as Barss and Lasnik (1986) and pace Larson (1988), that an element can only bind constituents to its right. Second, I produce some reason to believe that the correct binding (or command) relation cannot be framed in exclusively hierarchical terms but must be revised so that it makes reference to government as well. Specifically, I argue that the notion of binding appropriate to the binding theory makes reference both to c-commanding antecedents and to chains that are compounded under government."
provenance des données
La provenance des données du breton n'est pas spécifiée. On lit dans les remerciements: "I thank Martial Menard for his kindness and patience in sharing with me his knowledge of Breton. Thanks also to Lukian Kergoat, Patrick Farveau, and Beatrice for help with Breton."
p.124, Hendrick donne he tad, sans spirantisation, pour 'son père', au lieu de la forme attendue standard he zad (qu'il donne la page suivante dans l'exemple 17).
p.157, La donnée (116) Dec'h e gavas va c'hi ar c'hazh doit probablement être rétabli en Dec'h e kavas va c'hi ar c'hazh.
p.157, sentences such as (109)-(110) are ungrammatical in Breton devrait être rétabli en:
- sentences such as (109)-(110) if they had the prepositional object appear in postverbal position are ungrammatical in Breton.