Re: reciprocals — Their internal constitution and external distribution

Marcel den Dikken

doi:10.7557/12.8145

Authors

Marcel den Dikken Hungarian Research Centre for Linguistics and University of Lisbon https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2602-2331

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7557/12.8145

Keywords:

anaphor, nominal reciprocal, specificational asyndetic coordination, case, agreement

Abstract

In languages that have nominal reciprocals, these expressions exhibit morphosyntactic variation. This paper provides a detailed perspective on the range of this variation with the aid of a syntactic analysis that takes the composition of these expressions seriously, modelling their internal structure in the form of a syntax that assigns discrete structural positions to their component parts. In reciprocals juxtaposing a numeral and an alterity word (such as English one another), the numeral occupies the specifier and the ‘other’ part sits in the complement position of a head (overt in PPs, silent elsewhere) that mediates the relationship between the two. Reciprocal pronominals with this Spec–Head–Complement structure are barred from serving as direct arguments of verbs, being construed instead as asyndetic specifiers of a SE clitic pronoun.

References

Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur. 2020. The NP-Strategy for Expressing Reciprocity: Typology, History, Syntax and Semantics. No. 127 in Typological Studies in Language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.127.

Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur. 2024. Verbal strategies for expressing reciprocity – the case of Hebrew. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 9. https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.10274.

Barbiers, Sjef, Hans Bennis, Gunther De Vogelaer, Magda Devos, and Margreet van der Ham. 2005. Syntactic Atlas of the Dutch Dialects: Volume I: Pronouns, Agreement and Dependencies. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

Belletti, Adriana. 1982. On the anaphoric status of the reciprocal construction in Italian. The Linguistic Review 2: 101–37. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1982.2.2.101.

Birkenes, Magnus Breder and Jörg Fleischer. 2014. Intetkjønn med referanse til personer: To ulike normeringstradisjoner i nynorsk og tysk. Orð og tunga 16: 25–46.

Bolinger, Dwight. 1987. Each other and its friends. In Another Indiana University Linguistics Club Twentieth Anniversary Volume, edited by Dwight Bolinger, Jeanette Gundel, and Steven Cushing, pp. 1–36. Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, In.

Burzio, Luigi. 1981. Intransitive Verbs and Italian Auxiliaries. Ph.D. thesis, MIT, Cambridge, Ma.

Calle Martín, Javier. 2020. ‘We kissed one another and parted good friends.’ On the expression of reciprocity in Early Modern English. Onomázein 48: 45–68. https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.48.03.

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht.

Dalrymple, Mary, Makoto Kanazawa, Yookyung Kim, Sam Mchombo, and Stanley Peters. 1998. Reciprocal expressions and the concept of reciprocity. Linguistics and Philosophy 21: 159–220. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005330227480.

den Dikken, Marcel. 1999. On the structural representation of possession and agreement. The case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases. In Crossing Boundaries: Theoretical Advances in Central and Eastern European Languages, edited by István Kenesei, no. 182 in Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, pp. 137–78. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.182.10dik.

den Dikken, Marcel. 2006. Relators and Linkers. MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5873.001.0001.

den Dikken, Marcel. 2022. Ordinals, reflexives and unaccusatives: Unification by predication. Journal of Uralic Linguistics 1: 216–39. https://doi.org/10.1075/jul.00010.dik.

den Dikken, Marcel and Éva Dékány. 2025. On the order of case and possessive agreement in Udmurt. Paper presented at the Congressus XIV Internationalis Fenno-Ugristarum (14th International Congress for Finno-Ugric Studies), Tartu, 19 August 2025.

Evans, Nicholas. 2008. Reciprocal constructions: Towards a structural typology. In Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, edited by Ekkehard König and Volker Gast, no. 192 in Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, pp. 33–104. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199147.33.

Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Traci Walker (eds.). 2007. Reciprocals: Forms and Functions. Nos. 40–41 in Typological Studies in Language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.40 and https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.41.

Haas, Florian. 2010. Reciprocity in English. Historical Development and Synchronic Structure. Routledge Studies in Germanic Linguistics. Routledge, London.

Haegeman, Liliane. 2004. A DP-internal anaphor agreement effect. Linguistic Inquiry 35: 704–12. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2004.35.4.704.

Hale, Kenneth and Samuel Jay Keyser. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger, edited by Kenneth Hale and Samuel Jay Keyser, pp. 53–104. MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.

Heeroma, Klaas. 1942. Elkaar. De nieuwe taalgids 36: 218–22.

Heim, Irene, Howard Lasnik, and Robert May. 1991. Reciprocity and plurality. Linguistic Inquiry 22: 63–101.

Heringa, Herman. 2012. Appositional Constructions. Ph.D. thesis, University of Groningen.

Hüning, Matthias. 2006. Reciprociteit in het Nederlands: De geschiedenis van elkaar en mekaar. Nederlandse taalkunde 11: 185–217.

Kemmer, Suzanne. 1993. The Middle Voice. No. 23 in Typological Studies in Language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.23.

Knjazev, Jurij P. 1998. Towards a typology of grammatical polysemy: Reflexive markers as markers of reciprocity. In Typology of Verbal Categories: Papers Presented to Vladimir Nedjalkov on the Occasion of his 70th Birthday, edited by Leonid Kulikov and Heinz Vater, no. 382 in Linguistische Arbeiten, pp. 185–93. Niemeyer, Tübingen. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110913750.185.

Knjazev, Jurij P. 2007. Reciprocal constructions in Russian. In Reciprocal Constructions, edited by Vladimir P. Nedjalkov, Emma Š. Genišienė, and Zlatka Guentchéva, no. 71 in Typological Studies in Language, pp. 673–708. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.71.22knj.

König, Ekkehard and Volker Gast (eds.). 2008. Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations. No. 192 in Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199147.

König, Ekkehard and Shigehiro Kokutani. 2006. Towards a typology of reciprocal constructions: Focus on German and Japanese. Linguistics 44: 271–302. https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.010.

Koster, Jan. 2000. Extraposition as parallel construal. Ms., University of Groningen.

Landau, Idan. 2025. Reciprocal shift and symmetry breaking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 43: 1365–415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-024-09640-6.

Lebeaux, David. 1983. A distributional difference between reciprocals and reflexives. Linguistic Inquiry 14: 723–30.

Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1999. Reciprocals without reflexive. In Reciprocals: Forms and Functions, edited by Zygmunt Frajzyngier and Traci Walker, vol. 2, no. 41 in Typological Studies in Language, pp. 31–62. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.41.03lic.

Maslova, Elena. 2000. Reciprocals and set construal. In Reciprocals: Forms and Functions, edited by Zygmunt Frajzyngier and Traci Walker, vol. 2, no. 41 in Typological Studies in Language, pp. 161–78. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.41.08mas.

Messick, Troy and Gísli Harðarson. 2024. E-raising reconsidered: Constituency, coordination and case-matching reciprocals. Linguistic Inquiry 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00515.

Moro, Andrea. 1997. The Raising of Predicates. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511519956.

Moro, Andrea. 2000. Dynamic Antisymmetry. MIT Press, Cambridge, Ma.

Nedjalkov, Vladimir P., Emma Š. Genišienė, and Zlatka Guentchéva (eds.). 2007. Reciprocal Construc-tions. No. 71 in Typological Studies in Language. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.71.

Onea, Edgar and Dennis Ott. 2022. Nominal appositives in grammar and discourse. Language 98: 359–91. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2022.0004.

Ott, Dennis. 2016. Ellipsis in appositives. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 1. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.37.

Plank, Frans. 2017. Thoughts on the origin, progress, and pronominal status of reciprocal forms in Germanic, occasioned by those of Bavarian. Linguistic Typology 21: 347–73. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2017-1003.

Rákosi, György. 2002. Hungarian reciprocals. Paper presented at the Anaphora Typology Workshop, Utrecht, November 2002.

Ressue, Lauren. 2015. Reciprocity in Russian: An Investigation of the Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Interfaces. Ph.D. thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Oh.

Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. On the anaphor agreement effect. Rivista di linguistica 2: 27–42.

Safir, Ken. 2013. Syntax, binding, and patterns of anaphora. In The Cambridge Handbook of Generative Syntax, edited by Marcel den Dikken, pp. 515–76. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804571.020.

Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann, Jim Wood, and Einar Freyr Sigurðsson. 2020. Hvor ‘each’ reciprocals and distributives in Icelandic: E-raising + short main verb movement. Linguistic Inquiry 53: 571–88. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00411.

Siloni, Tal. 2008. The syntax of reciprocal verbs: An overview. In Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, edited by Ekkehard König and Volker Gast, no. 192 in Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, pp. 451–98. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110199147.451.

Szabolcsi, Anna. The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review 3: 89–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1983.3.1.89.

van den Toorn, M. C., W. J. Pijnenburg, J. A. van Leuvensteijn, and J. M. van der Horst (eds.). 1997. Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse taal. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam.

Vater, Heinz. 2006. Kasus in Appositionen. Lyon Linguistique Allemande (LYLIA) 8.

Verwijs, Eelco and Jacob van Dam. 1885–1929. Middelnederlandsch woordenboek. Nijhoff, The Hague.

Vezzosi, Letizia. 2010. Micro-processes of grammaticalization: The case of Italian l’un l’altro. In Grammaticalization: Current Views and Issues, edited by Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler, and Ekkehard König, no. 199 in Studies in Language Companion Series. pp. 343–72. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.119.18vez.

de Vries, Mark. 2006. The syntax of appositive relativization: On specifying coordination, false free relatives, and promotion. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 229–70. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2006.37.2.229.

Woolford, Ellen. 1999. More on the anaphor-agreement effect. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 257–87. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438999554057.

Živanović, Sašo. 2016. Quo vadis, Slovenian bipartite pronouns? In Formal Studies in Slovenian Syntax: In Honor of Janez Orešnik, edited by Franc L. Marušič, and Rok Žaucer, no. 236 in Linguistics Today, pp. 313–28. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.236.13ziv.