Since the pioneering work of Lees and Klima (1963), it has commonly been assumed that a single generalization determines the possible antecedents of anaphors (reflexive and reciprocal expressions) in English. The mechanisms proposed to express this generalization have evolved considerably over the last quarter century, but the transformations proposed by Lees and Klima, the rules of interpretation formulated by Jackendoff (1972), and Principle A of Chomsky's (1981; 1986) binding theory are all attempts to provide a unified account of the binding properties of the anaphors in (1), each of which is a coargument of its antecedent (ignoring" case-marking," or nonpredicative, prepositions), as well as those in (2), each of which is properly contained within a coargument of its antecedent.(1) a. Johni hates himselfi. b. The meni admired each otheri. c. Mary, explained Dorisj to herselfi,/. d. Danai talked to Genej about himselfi/j. e. The meni introduced the womenj to each otheri/.(2) a. Johni found [a picture of himselfi]. b. The womeni selected [pictures of each otheri]. c. The meni admired [each otheri's trophies]. d. The meni introduced the womenj to [each otheri/j's spouses].