author: Anna Kupsc
title: Polish Reflexives: A View from Lexical Semantics
affiliation: Polish Academy of Sciences,


Polish Reflexives: A View from Lexical Semantics

Polish has two types of reflexives: the anaphoric pronoun `siebie' (self)
and the clitic `sie' (we call the latter a reflexive marker, RM, and show
that it is a syntactic item rather than an affix). Many verbs can occur
with two forms, (1), which often amounts to treat 
`siebie' and `sie' on a par. Nevertheless, certain active transitive
verbs can appear only with the reflexive `siebie' and the RM cannot be used 
instead, see (2). In this paper, we concentrate on dissimilarities between
the two kinds of reflexives. We attempt to provide an explanation
grounded in lexical semantics as well as its formalization in HPSG, 
cf. Pollard and Sag 1994.  

As noted, e.g., in Lubowicz (1999), both reflexives have distinct syntactic
properties. The RM cannot be coordinated or modified, unlike the complement
`siebie'. Moreover, the impact of both reflexives is distinct: the verb 
and an RM form a kind of semantic unit denoting an activity (an `activity'
focus is obtained) whereas if `siebie' is used no such a 
unit is formed (an `object' focus results). The different semantic impact
of both reflexives is further evidenced by  distinct interpretations of
(3): if `siebie' is used, the sentence can be interpreted as referring
either to a real person or to the wax figure, (3a), whereas in (3b) the RM
can only refer to a real person (the reference to the wax figure 
is impossible); see Jackendoff (1992) for similar examples from English. 

Distinct properties of both types of reflexives led Lubowicz (1999) to a
conclusion that the RM, unlike the complement `siebie', is not a semantic
argument of a verb (the RM is not assigned a semantic role). We build on
this observation to explain the contrast in (2). 

Note first that the class of transitive verbs in (2) which cannot appear
with the RM is semantically restricted to the so-called experiencer subject
psychological verbs (ESPV): the experiencer of the mental state denoted by
the verb is expressed as a subject NP. According to Wechsler (1995),  the
specific property of ESPV is that the entity expressed as the subject must
have the notion (must know) of the entity denoted by the object. If the
RM does not correspond to a semantic argument, the semantic role of the
object is `lost' and (2) with an RM is semantically ill-formed. On the other
hand, `siebie' is a semantic argument of the verb, the semantic entailment
associated with ESPV is fulfilled and (2) with `siebie' is correctly
predicted to be grammatical.  

In the full paper, we formalize these intuitions in HPSG adopting the
hierarchy of semantic relations of Koenig and Davis (1999). According to
our analysis, both reflexives are syntactic items subcategorized by the
verb. In contrast to `siebie', however, the RM is never a semantic argument
of a verb (the RM is not linked to any entity which is the value of an
attribute specifying a semantic role).  

(1) Janek zobaczyl sie/siebie w lustrze. 
    John  saw      RM  self   in mirror
   `John saw himself in the mirror.'

(2) Janek siebie/*sie rozumie /   lubi / podziwia / nienawidzi. 
    John  RM     self understands likes  admires  hates        
   `John understands/likes/admires/hates himself.'

(3) a. W trakcie zwiedzania Mme Tussaud, Gorbaczow nie rozpoznal  siebie
       in time   visiting   Mme Tussaud  Gorbachov not recognized self
      (?swojej figury woskowej). 
       self's  figure of-wax
      `Gorbachov did not recognize himself (his wax figure) when he was
       visiting Mme Tussaud.'
    b. W trakcie zwiedzania Mme Tussaud, Gorbaczow nie rozpoznal  sie
       in time   visiting   Mme Tussaud  Gorbachov not recognized RM
      (*swojej figury woskowej).
       self's  figure of-wax
      `Gorbachov did not recognize himself when he was visiting Mme Tussaud.'


Pollard and Sag (1999). Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar.
  Chicago University Press, Chicago.

Lubowicz (1999). Two views on Polish reflexives. In Proceedings of WCCFL 18.

Jackendoff (1992). Madame Tussaud meets the Binding Theory.
  NLLT, 10, 1-31.

Wechsler (1995). The Semantic Basis of Argument Structure. CSLI
  Publications, Stanford. 

Koenig and Davis (1999). Linking as constraints on word classes in a
  hierarchical lexicon. In V. Kordoni, ed., Proceedings of the ESSLLI-99
  Workshop on Lexical Semantics and Linking in Constraint-Based Theories,
  pp. 1-45.