Bob makes correct observations when he says that Construction
Grammarians themselves must do some chopping to come up with
constructions.  I think the advantage is the lower expectation that
constructions will be sums of their parts.

As to reflexive, Bob gives rule 5:

5. NP  want to V -self; The reflexive pronoun's antecedent is the
subject NP of want.

And 6 as counterexample:

6. I wonder who Mary wants to feed herself.

But 6 is very different from the sentences 5 was based on; it has an
embedded clause. If we rearrange the embedded clause to reflect
non-subordinate word order, we get:

Mary wants who to feed herself

which is

7. NP want NP to V -self, not

NP  want to V -self

The coreference for a clause like 7 is to between 'Xself' and the second
NP, not the subject.

I don't know what the Construction Grammar analysis is for cases like
this. For all I know, the embedded version of the clause may be
considered an entirely different construction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Johanna Rubba   Associate Professor, Linguistics
English Department, California Polytechnic State University
One Grand Avenue  • San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
Tel. (805)-756-2184  •  Fax: (805)-756-6374 • Dept. Phone.  756-2596
• E-mail: [log in to unmask] •  Home page: http://www.cla.calpoly.edu/~jrubba
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/