Abstract The present paper is a reassessment of the empirical and theoretical arguments presented by some minimalist accounts for binding. Some of them assume that the binding principles are conditions on LF representations, while others argue that they are derived by narrow syntax computations. I present some observations indicating that there is not yet a satisfactory account for binding. Despite that, the amounted evidence indicates that binding is derivational. Nevertheless, pragmatics seems also engaged in building coreferentiality.

Na teoria de Princípios & Parâmetros, principalmente nas propostas de Chomsky, objetos complexos formados via movimento (i.e., cadeias) não são autorizados a participar de relações temáticas. O presente artigo argumenta que essa restrição não tem suporte teórico nem empírico.

Within the Principle & Parameters approach due mainly to proposals by Chomsky it has been argued that complex objects formed by movement (i.e., chains) are not eligible to participate in thematic relations. The present paper rejects this view, claiming that this restriction is justified neither on conceptual nor on empirical grounds.