SIL talk by Boban Arsenijević (University of Graz)

From intensification to reflexivization and back

It has been observed in the literature that a strong link exists cross-linguistically between intensified and reflexive pronouns (König & Siemund 2005, É. Kiss & Mus 2022, a.o.). Various patterns are attested: reflexive pronouns (i.e. anaphors) which are at the same time intensifiers (such as  the English pro-self), reflexive pronouns which are the same as intensified pronouns, i.e. the reflexivizer is at the same time an intensifier (such as the Dravidian tann/taan), as well as independent reflexive pronouns and intensified pronouns, where intensified pronouns can be bound in the reflexive way, unlike other non-reflexive pronouns (as in the case of Slavic se(b)- and sam).

(1)    a.      He himself criticizes himself.

b.     അവൻ   താനേ     ക്രിറ്റിസൈസ്അ   വനെ    താനേ
avan            thaane        critticisa                              vane         thaane
he                 self               criticize                                him           self
‘He himself criticized himself.’ (also: ‘He_i himself criticized him_j himself.’)

c.      On   sam    je      kritikovao     sebe   (samog).
he    self     aux  criticized        refl     self
’He himself criticized (the very) himself.’

I propose an analysis on which the full-fledged intensifier contrasts the referent of the highest degree of aboutness within the topic situation with some salient set of alternatives. This results either in the contrastive topic status of this referent (when (1) answers the question Who does his group criticize?), or in the identification of the topic and focus (when (1) answers the question Who criticizes him?). I further discuss the sources and role of logophoricity.