English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Bound anaphors inside subjects challenge the c-command requirement for binding. At least in some  languages, experiencer-object verbs such as  worry  or  please  are reported  to license this type of backward dependence. In many cases, the underlying facts are based on unstable  intuitions potentially influenced by intervening factors, such as accidental coreference and binding illusions.  This article reports the results of an experiment on backward binding with accusative and dative  experiencer-object verbs in German; in this experiment, crucial sources of variation are controlled.  The results show that verb class (experiencer-object vs. agentive) has a significant effect on variable binding,  both for dative and for accusative verbs. This result cannot be accounted for through accidental coreference  and is not reducible to effects of sentence aspect, the latter being correlated with the distinction between  experiencer-object and agentive verbs. These findings are evidence for backward binding as a genuine psych  effect in German.

Backward binding as a psych effect: A binding illusion?