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/