Government and binding is a theory of syntax in the tradition of transformational grammar developed principally by Noam Chomsky in the 1980s. This theory is a radical revision of his earlier theories Chomsy, Noam (1970). Remarks on Nominalization. In Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar (1972). The Hague: Mouton. Pages 11-61. and was later revised in The Minimalist Program (1995) and several subsequent papers —the latest being Three Factors in Language Design (2005). Although there is a large literature on government and binding theory which is not written by Chomsky, Chomsky's papers have been foundational in setting the research agenda.

The name refers to two central subtheories of the theory: government, which is an abstract syntactic relation, and binding, which deals with the referents of pronouns, anaphores, and R-expression. GB was the first theory to be based on the principles and parameters model of language, which also underlies the later developments of the Minimalist Program.

Binding

The definition of binding has changed little from its initial conception; the final version is as follows:
* An element α binds an element β if and only if α c-commands β, and α and β are co-referent.

Consider the sentence "John saw his mother." which is diagrammed below using simple phrase structure rules.

Image:Government and Binding Theory basic tree.png

"John" c-commands "his" because the first non-trivial parent of "John", S, contains "his". "John" and "his" are also co-referent (they refer to the same person), therefore "John" binds "his".

On the other hand, in the sentence "A friend of John saw his mother", "John" does not c-command "his", so they have no binding relationship, regardless of whether they are co-referent (which they may be; the example is ambiguous).

The importance of binding is shown in the grammaticality of the following sentences:

1. *John_i saw him_i. (ungrammatical with co-reference)


2. John saw himself. (unambiguously co-referent)


3. *Himself saw John. (ungrammatical)


4. *John_i saw John_i. (ungrammatical, unless it refers to two distinct Johns)

Binding is used, along with particular binding principles, to explain the ungrammaticality of those statements. The applicable rules are called Binding Principle A, Binding Principle B, and Binding Principle C.

Principle A BPA states that reflexives (and reciprocals, such as "each other") must always be bound in their domains. Since there is nothing to bind "himself" in sentence 3 , that principle is violated, and the sentence is ungrammatical.

Principle B BPB states that a pronoun must never be bound within its domain. If, in sentence 1 , "John" and "him" are co-referent, then there is a binding relationship between them, violating the principle and resulting in ungrammaticality.

Principle C BPC states that R-expressions must never be bound. R-expressions are referential expressions: non-pronoun, uniquely identifiable entities, such as "the dog", or proper names such as "John". In sentence 4 , the first instance of "John" binds the second, resulting in the ungrammaticality.

Note that Principles A and B refer to domains. It is difficult to define a domain in a way that explains all the data, though the definition may be related to movement islands and the Phase Impenetrability Constraint.

Further reading

* Liliane Haegeman (1994). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory (Second Edition). Blackwell.

References

External links

*A step-by-step introduction to the Government and Binding theory of syntax
*Introduction to GB

Category:Generative linguistics
Category:Noam Chomsky
Category:Syntax