How native (L1) and non-native (L2) readers utilise syntactic constraints on linguistic dependency resolution during language comprehension is debated, with previous research yielding mixed findings. To address this discrepancy, we report two large-scale studies, using self-paced reading and grammaticality judgements, investigating subject-verb agreement and reflexives in L1 English speakers and Arabic learners of L2 English. We manipulated sentence grammaticality and the properties of ‘distractor’ constituents (The key(s) to the cabinet(s) were rusty) in two studies testing number in agreement and gender/number in reflexives. Study 1 showed that L2ers’ performance largely patterned with L1ers’. Although grammaticality effects were smaller for agreement in L2ers than in L1ers, proficiency modulated L2 performance. Study 2 revealed no significant between-group differences. Contrasting some L1 studies, significant distractor effects were only detected for reflexives in Study 1. Together, these results imply that L2ers compute syntactic dependencies similarly to L1ers, and potential differences might be driven by L2 proficiency.

A body of psycholinguistic research shows that structural constraints play a large role in guiding anaphora resolution in the early moments of processing (Nicol and Swinney 1989; Harris et al. 2000; Sturt 2003; Kazanina et al. 2007; Xiang et al. 2009; Chow et al. 2014). Omaki (2010) and Omaki et al. (2019) report on an interesting case where reflexives in wh-predicate fronting constructions launch a search that is not structurally guided. We further investigate this phenomenon, by asking whether non-structurally guided retrievals of this sort result in comprehenders ever committing to ungrammatical antecedents, perhaps as a ‘lingering’ interpretation of the sort found with garden path sentences (Christianson et al. 2001; Ferreira et al. 2001; Slattery et al. 2013). In two forced-choice studies, we find evidence that ungrammatical dependencies resulting from a non-structural search are sometimes maintained in offline comprehension, particularly with a more demanding task. We then probe the incremental processing that follows non-structurally guided retrieval, asking if and when the processor initiates a renewed search. In a self-paced reading experiment, we show that the processor continues its search for an antecedent very soon after retrieving a non-structurally guided antecedent. Surprisingly, however, we found a similar processing profile in cases where a structurally licensed antecedent was already encountered. While it has been recently shown that cataphoric pronouns persist in an antecedent search after a failed retrieval (Giskes and Kush 2021), our results suggest that when reflexives locate a preceding antecedent – by either a structural or non-structural search – this does not terminate further consideration of a different dependency. We consider these data in light of the comparison between cataphoric elements and wh-fillers in launching an active search to complete a dependency.

This squib provides counterexamples to the claim that Icelandic reflexive sig cannot be construed logophorically if immediately contained inside an infinitival clause. Consequences for Eric Reuland's views on the division of labor between grammar and pragmatics are discussed.

This short communication is concerned with long object shift of reflexives in Swedish. Only 3rd person reflexives can shift across their antecedent. For some reason this is possible even if the antecedent is 1st or 2nd person as well, but certain requirements on the antecedent are necessary. This paper shows that neither a purely syntactic nor a purely semantic analysis can account for all the facts. Instead the best analysis seems to be one that makes use of Bonet's (1995) post-syntactic morphological processes: feature delinking, feature erasure and feature insertion.

Norwegian allows binding into finite subordinate clauses when the subordinate subject is inanimate and has a thematic role that is low on the hierarchy of thematic roles (e.g. Hun trodde hun gjorde det som var best for seg selv ‘she thought she did that which was best for refl self’). This kind of long distance binding is productive, and generally acceptable, but it has never been mentioned in the literature. This article discusses its syntactic and semantic properties. It is shown that the reflexives in question are not necessarily logophoric, and that they prefer a distributive interpretation. The general binding properties of inanimate subjects are discussed, and it is proposed that binding theory must have the option to disregard them. Binding across inanimate subjects can then be treated as local binding.