<p>I argue in this work that Reinhart & Reuland’s (1993) conditions A and B hold for Spanish. I provide evidence supporting the hypothesis that this language makes use of both <strong>SE </strong>and <strong>SELF</strong>-anaphors. Inherent reflexive verbs undergo an internal argument reduction operation in the lexicon. However, the syntax always requires two arguments. Therefore certain clitics, which are SE-anaphors, are inserted in these derivations. This is a last-resort mechanism that makes an adjustment between the valence of the lexical entry of the verb and the requirements of the syntax in order for the derivation to converge at the C-I interface. These clitics are syntactic arguments. Nevertheless, they are not interpreted as semantic arguments since they violate the <em>double chain condition, </em>which forces nominal elements to share both a tense and thematic features with the verb and the tense heads. Non- inherent reflexive verbs require the presence of a SELF-anaphor, which is formed out of a SE-anaphor along with a protector SELF element. Therefore, both syntactic elements are interpreted as two distinguishable semantic elements at C-I despite the fact that there is binding between them both. The interpretation of both syntactic elements as just one semantic element is a pragmatic epiphenomenon.</p>
Reflexivity and adjustment strategies at the interfaces