Reflexive pronoun
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A reflexive pronoun is a pronoun that is preceded by the noun or pronoun to which it refers (its antecedent) within the same clause. In generative grammar, a reflexive pronoun is an anaphor that must be bound by its antecedent (see binding). In some languages, there is a difference between reflexive and non-reflexive pronouns; but the exact conditions that determine whether something is bound are not yet well defined and depend on the language in question.
In English, the reflexive pronouns are myself, yourself, thyself, himself, herself, itself, oneself, ourselves, yourselves, and themselves. In the statements "I see him" and "She sees you", the objects are not the same persons as the subjects, and regular pronouns are used. However, when the person being seen is the same as the person who is seeing, the reflexive pronoun is used: "I see myself" or "She sees herself".
Contents |
[edit] Non-standard usage
It is increasingly common to use reflexive pronouns without local linguistic antecedents to refer to discourse participants or people already referenced in a discourse: for example, "Please, forward the information to myself". Such formulations are usually considered non-standard. Within the linguisitcs literature, reflexives with discourse antecedents are often referred to as "logophors". Standard English does allow the use of logophors in some contexts: for example, "John was angry. Embarrassing pictures of himself were on display". However, within Standard English, this logophoric use of reflexives is generally limited to positions where the reflexive does not have a coargument.[1] The newer non-standard usage does not respect this limitation.
It is common in some subsets of the English-speaking population, including Americans, to use standard objective pronouns to express reflexive relations, especially in the first and sometimes second persons, and especially for the indirect object: for example, "I want to get me some supper." This usage is non-standard.
[edit] Origins and usage
Sometimes, the reflexive pronoun is added to highlight its antecedent. A reflexive pronoun used in this appositive way is called an intensive pronoun and, in English, is accepted as standard: for example, "I, myself, wrote this" and "We gave the card to our parents, themselves".
In Indo-European languages, the reflexive pronoun has its origins in Proto-Indo-European. In some languages, the distinction between the normal objective and the reflexive pronouns exists mainly in the third person: whether one says "I like me" or "I like myself", there is no question that the object is the same person as the subject; but, in "They like them(selves)", there can be uncertainty about the identity of the object unless a distinction exists between the reflexive and the nonreflexive. In some languages, this distinction includes genitive forms: see, for instance, the Swedish examples below.
In languages with a distinct reflexive pronoun form, it is often gender-neutral.
[edit] Swedish examples
- Jag ser honom. (I see him.)
- Han ser honom. (He sees him. Him designates a person other than the one designated by He.)
- Han ser sig. (He sees himself.)
In Swedish, there is also a difference between normal and reflexive genitives:
- Anna gav Maria hennes bok. (Anna gave her [Maria's] book to Maria.)
- Anna gav Maria sin bok. (Anna gave her [Anna's] book to Maria.)
[edit] Serbian examples
- Ana je dala Mariji njenu knjigu. (Ana gave her [Maria's] book to Maria.)
- Ana je dala Mariji svoju knjigu. (Ana gave her [Ana's] book to Maria.)
[edit] Spanish examples
- Él lo ve. (He sees him.)
- Él se ve. (He sees himself.)
[edit] Novial examples
(Novial is a constructed language, mostly based on Romance languages.)
- Lo vida lo. (He sees him.)
- Lo vida se. (He sees himself.)
- Anna donad lan libre a Maria. (Anna gave her [Maria's] book to Maria.)
- Anna donad sen libre a Maria. (Anna gave her [Anna's] book to Maria.)
[edit] Reference
- ^ Pollard, Carl & Ivan Sag (1992). "Anaphors in English and the Scope of the Binding Theory". Linguistic Inquiry (23): 261-303.