| Cole, Hermon, and Yanti (2015) argue that the empirical facts related to anaphoric binding in two dialects of Jambi Malay undermine the Classical Binding Theory. Reuland (2017) agrees with this conclusion but argues that the data are easily accounted for by his alternative Universal Grammar-based approach to Binding. In this response, we demonstrate that the alternative proposal for Jambi Malay rests on claims about the language that are incorrect. While we do not, indeed cannot, demonstrate that it is impossible for a Universal Grammar based proposal to account for the facts as outlined in CHY (2015), we conclude that those facts remain an outstanding challenge. |