English self-forms and related words from other Germanic languages (e.g. Dutch zelf, Swedish sjalv, etc.) are used in two different functions: as 'intensifiers' (e.g. The president himself made the decision) and as markers of reflexivity (John criticized himself). On the basis of a comparative syntactic and semantic analysis, this book addresses the question of why two such apparently different functions can be expressed by the same word. This question is answered by showing that both intensifying and reflexive self-forms can be analysed as expressing the concept of 'identity'. In the first part of The Grammar of Identity, the most central facts concerning the distribution of intensifiers in Germanic languages are surveyed and a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis is provided. It is shown that all instances of intensifiers can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. The second part of the book offers an analysis of reflexive self-forms which is based on recent theories of reflexivity, modifying these in some important respects. In particular, the distribution of reflexive self-forms is explained with reference to semantic properties of the sentential environment. In this way, it can be shown that reflexive self-forms - like intensifiers - can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. In addition to providing a thorough comparative description of the hitherto poorly described area of intensifiers in Germanic languages, this book offers an answer to a long standing question in descriptive and theoretical linguistics, namely why self-forms are used in two apparently different functions. By combining analytical methods from syntax, lexical semantics and sentence semantics the study moreover contributes to an understanding of the interaction between structure, meaning and context in a central area of lexico-grammar.

English self-forms and related words from other Germanic languages (e.g. Dutch zelf, Swedish sjalv, etc.) are used in two different functions: as 'intensifiers' (e.g. The president himself made the decision) and as markers of reflexivity (John criticized himself). On the basis of a comparative syntactic and semantic analysis, this book addresses the question of why two such apparently different functions can be expressed by the same word. This question is answered by showing that both intensifying and reflexive self-forms can be analysed as expressing the concept of 'identity'. In the first part of The Grammar of Identity, the most central facts concerning the distribution of intensifiers in Germanic languages are surveyed and a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis is provided. It is shown that all instances of intensifiers can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. The second part of the book offers an analysis of reflexive self-forms which is based on recent theories of reflexivity, modifying these in some important respects. In particular, the distribution of reflexive self-forms is explained with reference to semantic properties of the sentential environment. In this way, it can be shown that reflexive self-forms - like intensifiers - can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. In addition to providing a thorough comparative description of the hitherto poorly described area of intensifiers in Germanic languages, this book offers an answer to a long standing question in descriptive and theoretical linguistics, namely why self-forms are used in two apparently different functions. By combining analytical methods from syntax, lexical semantics and sentence semantics the study moreover contributes to an understanding of the interaction between structure, meaning and context in a central area of lexico-grammar.

The volume is a collection of thirteen papers given at the "Third Syntax of the World's Languages" conference, complemented with four additional papers as well as an introduction by the editors. All contributions deal with clause combining, focusing on one or both of the following two dimensions of analysis: properties of the clauses involved, types of dependency. The studies are data-driven and have a cross-linguistic or typological orientation. In addition to survey papers the volume contains in-depth studies of particular languages, mostly based on original data collected in recent field work.

This collection of original papers is a representative survey of recent theoretical and cross-linguistic work on reciprocity and reflexivity. Its most remarkable feature is its combination of formal approaches, case studies on individual languages and broad typological surveys in one volume, showing that the interaction of formal approaches to grammar and typology may lead to new insights and results for both fields. Among the major issues addressed in this volume are the following: How can our current knowledge about the space and limits of variation in the relevant domain be captured in a structural typology of reciprocity? What light can such a typology shed on the facts of particular languages or groups of languages (e.g. Austronesian)? How can recent descriptive and typological insights be incorporated into a revised and more adequate version of the Binding Theory? How do verbal semantics, argument structure and reciprocal markers interact? How can we explain the pervasive patterns of ambiguity observable in these two domains, especially the use of the same forms both as reflexive and reciprocal markers? What are the major sources in the historical development of reciprocal markers? This combination of large-scale typological surveys with in-depth studies of particular languages provides new answers to old questions and raises important new questions for future research.