Abstract Old English se-demonstratives (which usually trace less salient referents) and personal pronouns (usually continuing previous topics) have frequently been taken to share a common pronominal property (e.g. Breban 2012; Epstein 2011; van Gelderen 2013, 2011; Kiparsky 2002; Howe 1996). This assumption holds despite their non-overlapping distribution which still remains a puzzle (cf. van Gelderen 2013; Los and van Kemenade 2018). In this paper, we argue that this distributional discrepancy stems from the lack of syntactic and formal affinities between the two forms. Se-demonstratives are either dependent (introducing full DPs) or independent (usually labeled as “pronominal”), but still instances of the same lexical item. As a D-category, they necessarily license their NP complements regardless of their being lexical or empty, thereby entering into tight formal and semantic relations with their nominal antecedents. In doing so, they rely on the working of their gender- and case-features, the two carrying semantic import and mapping onto the specific reference [+ref/spec]-property in the semantic module(s). Being bundles of case- and/or φ-features, pronominals lack the complex syntactic structure of se-demonstratives. Their formal and semantic relations with nominal antecedents are thus less intimate, holding due to interpretable person- and number-features.

中文翻译：

---

在特征映射和主题突出之间：古英语语篇中的 se 指示词和代词

摘要 古英语的 se-demongatives（通常追踪不太显着的指称）和人称代词（通常延续以前的主题）经常被用来共享一个共同的代词属性（例如 Breban 2012; Epstein 2011; van Gelderen 2013, 2011; Kiparsky 2002;豪 1996)。尽管它们的分布不重叠，但这一假设仍然是一个难题（参见 van Gelderen 2013；Los 和 van Kemenade 2018）。在本文中，我们认为这种分布差异源于两种形式之间缺乏句法和形式上的相似性。Se 指示词要么是依赖的（引入完整的 DP），要么是独立的（通常标记为“代词”），但仍然是同一词汇项的实例。作为 D 类，他们必须许可他们的 NP 补语，无论它们是词汇还是空的，从而与其名义上的先行词进入紧密的形式和语义关系。在这样做时，他们依赖于他们的性别和案例特征的工作，这两者携带语义导入并映射到语义模块中的特定参考 [+ref/spec] 属性。作为格和/或 φ 特征的捆绑，代词缺乏 se 指示词的复杂句法结构。由于可解释的人称和数字特征，它们与名义上的先行词的形式和语义关系因此不那么亲密。作为格和/或 φ 特征的捆绑，代词缺乏 se 指示词的复杂句法结构。由于可解释的人称和数字特征，它们与名义上的先行词的形式和语义关系因此不那么亲密。作为格和/或 φ 特征的捆绑，代词缺乏 se 指示词的复杂句法结构。由于可解释的人称和数字特征，它们与名义上的先行词的形式和语义关系因此不那么亲密。