. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Apr 1.

Published in final edited form as: Cogn Linguist. 2013 Apr;24(2):10.1515/cog-2013-0010. doi: 10.1515/cog-2013-0010

Table 5.

Possible clashes between two iconic strategies

	Example	Person value of argument	Canonical Mapping	Resulting Clashes
(a)	‘I phoned him’	*Subject:* 1^st person *Object:* Non-1^st person	*Subject:* Body = subject = 1^st P *Object:* Body ≠ object ≠ non-1^st P	No clash
(b)	‘You phoned her’	*Subject:* Non-1^st person *Object:* Non-1^st person	*Subject:* Body = subject = 1^st P *Object:* Body ≠ object ≠ non-1^st P	Body = subject ≠ 1^st P
(c)	‘He phoned me’	*Subject:* Non-1^st person (≠ body) *Object:* 1^st person (= body)	*Subject:* Body = subject = 1^st P *Object:* Body ≠ object ≠ non-1^st P	Body = subject ≠ 1^st P Body = object = 1^st P