seek their antecedent outside of the local binding domain containing them, e.g. a. Fredi asked whether Jim mentioned himi. – Indicated reading easily possible b. *Fred asked whether Jimi mentioned himi. – Indicated reading impossible a. Ginai hopes that Wilma will mention heri. – Indicated reading easily possible b. *Gina hopes that Wilmai will mention heri. – Indicated reading impossible In these cases, the pronoun has to look outside of the embedded clause containing it to the matrix clause to find its antecedent. Hence based on such data, the relevant binding domain appears to be the clause. Further data illustrate, however, that the clause is actually not the relevant domain: a. Fredi likes the picture of himi. – Indicated reading possible b. Ginai has heard the rumor about heri. – Indicated reading possible Since the pronouns appear within the same minimal clause containing their antecedents in these cases, one cannot argue that the relevant binding domain is the clause. The most one can say based on such data is that the domain is "clause-like". Nouns The distribution of common and proper nouns is unlike that of reflexive, reciprocal, and personal pronouns. The relevant observation in this regard is that a noun is often reluctantly coreferential with another nominal that is within its binding domain or in a superordinate binding domain, e.g. a. Susani admires herselfi. – Indicated reading obligatory b. #Susani admires Susani. – Indicated reading possible, but special context necessary a. Fredi thinks that hei is the best. – Indicated reading easily possible b. #Fredi thinks that Fredi is the best. – Indicated reading possible, but special context necessary The readings indicated in the a-sentences are natural, whereas the b-sentences are very unusual. Indeed, sentences like these b-sentences were judged to be impossible in the traditional binding theory according to Condition C (see below). Given a contrastive context, however, the b-sentences can work, e.g. Susan does not admire Jane, but rather Susani admires Susani. One can therefore conclude that nouns are not sensitive to binding domains in the same way that reflexive, reciprocal, and personal pronouns are. Linear order The following subsections illustrate the extent to which pure linear order impacts the distribution of pronouns. While linear order is clearly important, it is not the only factor influencing where pronouns can appear. Linear order is a factor A simple hypothesis concerning the distribution of many anaphoric elements, of personal