Starting with the observation that reflexives do not form a homogenous class, we develop a formal typology for reflexives. In particular, on the basis of data from English (Germanic), French (Romance), Shona (Bantu), Plains Cree (Algonquian), and Halkomelem (Salish), we argue for the existence of (at least) five categorically distinct reflexive forms: D-reflexives, φ-reflexives, Class-reflexives, n-reflexives, and N-reflexives. We present the following arguments in support of this typology: (i) reflexive forms differ in their syntactic distribution; (ii) reflexive forms differ in the syntactic parallelism they exhibit; (iii) reflexive forms differ in the patterns of multi-functionality they exhibit; (iv) reflexive forms differ in their syntactic integration into the clause; (v) reflexive forms differ in their semantic mode of composition. The analysis that we develop is couched within the Interface Syntax model of Wiltschko & Dechaine (2010), according to which sound-meaning bundles freely associate with a universally defined syntactic spine.

中文翻译：

---

自反的正式类型学

从观察反身词不会形成同质类开始，我们为反身词开发了一个正式的类型学。特别是，根据来自英语（日耳曼语）、法语（罗曼语）、绍纳语（班图语）、克里语平原（阿尔冈琴语）和哈尔科梅勒姆语（萨利什语）的数据，我们认为存在（至少）五种在分类上截然不同的反身形式：D-reflexives、φ-reflexives、Class-reflexives、n-reflexives 和 N-reflexives。我们提出以下论点来支持这种类型学：(i) 反身形式的句法分布不同；(ii) 反身形式的不同之处在于它们表现出的句法平行性；(iii) 反身形式的不同之处在于它们表现出的多功能性模式；(iv) 反身形式在句法整合上不同；(v) 反身形式的语义构成方式不同。