Journal article Open Access
The present paper examines the rationale for the argument status of cross-referencing forms given in FG and also in other theoretical frameworks, e.g. Lexical Functional Grammar (Bresnan and Mchombo 1987), Government and Binding (Jelinek 1984), and identifies a number of problems posed by such an analysis. While some of the issues may find an adequate resolution within the context of FG, it is argued that most either disappear or can be handled better under an ‘agreement’ as opposed to ‘argument’ analysis of the crossreferencing forms. It is also argued, that even if the pronominal argument analysis is maintained for some languages, those of the radically head marking type, there are no convincing grounds for extending it to dependent marking languages such as Latin.