Binding Local Person Pronouns Without Semantically Empty Features

I shall refer to the reading in (1b) as the ‘bound reading’ of sentence (1), and to the reading in (1a) as the ‘strict reading’ of (1). The availability of the bound reading in (1) and sentences akin to it has garnered a healthy amount of attention in recent years (Heim 1991, Kratzer 1998, Heim 2002, Rullmann 2003, Schlenker 2003, von Stechow 2003, Kratzer 2005, Schlenker 2005). The prima facie interest of such sentences is that they seem to suggest that local person pronouns can be bound, contrary to the so-called ‘Fixity Thesis’, famously embodied in the proposals of Kaplan (1977).