Binding Theory, Scope Reconstruction, and NPI Licensing Under Scrambling in Hindi

It is well known that sometimes moved phrases are interpreted in the position that they originate from. This phenomenon is known as Scope Reconstruction. There are two main approaches to account for this. The first, known as Syntactic Reconstruction (SynR), assumes that the “reconstructed” phrase is moved back at Logical Form (LF), and the usual semantics applies. The second, known as Semantic Reconstruction (SemR), assumes that the reconstructed phrase is interpreted in the higher position, but that its trace is type shifted to a higher type, giving a “lowered” interpretation. The argument for SynR comes from the fact that in many languages (like English), patterns of anaphora involving moved phrases (wh-movement as well as raising) that are interpreted at a lower position can be explained if one assumes that the moved phrase is lowered in the syntax of LF, where Binding principles apply. In this squib, I consider data from Hindi that involve NPI licensing under scrambling that are problematic for an account based on SynR, as the expected violations of Principle A and Principle C that form the major argument for SynR, do not arise. This leads to the conclusion that SemR must sometimes be allowed in cases of Scope Reconstruction.