chapter 7

173

Chapter 7CONSTRAINING X-BAR THEORY: THETA ROLES & THE LEXICON

0. INTRODUCTION

In chapters 5 and 6, we have developed a very simple (only three rules)

and general theory of phrase structure: X-bar theory. This theory accounts forthe distinction between adjuncts, complements and specifiers. It incorporates themore articulated view of sentence hierarchy required by constituency tests, andit captures cross categorial generalizations (i.e. the fact that all kinds of phrases

--NPs, VPs, APs, PPs, CPs, DPs, and IPs -- have the same basic properties.)Most importantly, i t allows us to draw trees for most of the sentences of anylanguage.

This said, there is a significant problem with X-bar theory: it alsogenerates sentences that are not acceptable or grammatical! Take for examplethe following pairs of grammatical and ungrammatical sentences:

1) a) Rosemary hates Santa Cruzb) *Rosemary hates

2) a) Jennie smiled.

b) *Jennie smiled the breadbox

174 Sentence Structure: A Generative Introduction

© Andrew Carnie

3) a) Traci gave the whale a jawbreakerb) *Traci gave the whalec) *Traci gave a jawbreaker

Sentence (1) is should be perfectly acceptable (compare it to [Rosemary ran] ).X-bar theory says that complements are optional. Therefore, direct objects,

which are complements, should be optional. The opposite fact is seen in the pairin (2). X-bar theory optionally allows a complement. So having a direct objecthere should be fine. The same kind of effect is seen in (3), where both the directobject and indirect object are obligatory – contra X-bar theory.

What seems to be at work here is that certain verbs require objects andothers don’t. It appears to be a property of the particular verb. Information aboutthe peculiar or particular properties of verbs is contained in our mental

dictionary or Lexicon. In this chapter, we’ll look at how we can use the lexiconto constrain X-bar theory, so that it doesn’t predict the existence ofungrammatical sentences.

1.0 SOME BASIC TERMINOLOGY

Before launching into the structure of the lexicon, it is worth exploring some

basic terminology that we use when describing the restrictions particular verbsplace on their subjects and objects.

First, we need to refine the notion of predicate. The notion presented

here is slightly different (and more narrow) than the definition we gave in thelast chapter. We are going to base the notion predicate on the mathematicalnotion of a “relation”:

4) The predicate defines the relation between the individuals being talkedabout and the real world -- as well as with each other.

The individuals participating in the relation are called arguments.

5) The arguments are the individuals who are participating in the relation.

Chapter7 –Theta Roles and the Lexicon 175

© Andrew Carnie

To see how this works, look at the following example:

6) Gwen hit the baseball.

There are two arguments in this example, Gwen and the baseball. These areelements in the world that are participants in the action described by the

sentence. The predicate here is hit. Hit expresses a relation between the twoarguments: more precisely, it indicates that the first argument (Gwen) isapplying some force to the second argument (the baseball). This may seempatently self-evident, but it’s important to understand what is going on here on

an abstract level.

We can speak about any particular predicate’s argument structure.This refers to the number of arguments that a particular predicate requires. Take,

for example, predicates that take only one argument. These are predicates likesmile, arrive, sit, run, etc. and are called intransitives. Predicates that take twoobligatory arguments are called transitives; some examples are hit, love, see,

kiss, admire, etc. Finally predicates that take two arguments are calledditransitives. Put and give are the best examples of this class.

7)

Name # of Arguments example

intransitive 1 argument smile, arrive

transitive 2 arguments hit, love, kiss

ditransitive 3 arguments give, put.

In determining how many arguments a predicate has, we only considercomplements and specifiers. Adjuncts are never counted in the list of

arguments. Only obligatory elements are considered arguments.


© Andrew Carnie

Did you run the race?

The claim that only obligatory arguments are found in argument

structure is not as straightforward as it sounds. Consider the verb

run. It has both an intransitive use (I ran) and a transitive use (I ran

the race). A similar problem is raised by languages that can drop

the subject argument (eg. Spanish and Italian). The subject is still

an argument in these languages. Can you come up with a

hypothesis as to why?

Predicates impose more restrictions on their arguments than simply

stating how many of them appear. For example, they also place restrictions onthe categories of their complements. A verb like ask can take either an NP or aCP as a complement:

8) I asked [NP the question]9) I asked [CP if you knew the answer]

But a verb like hit can only take an NP complement:

10) I hit [NP the ball]11) *I hit [that you knew the answer]

Restrictions on the categories that a verb can have as a complement are calledsubcategorization restrictions. In addition to these, we also find semantic

restrictions on what can appear in particular positions:

12) #My toothbrush loves raisonettes.13) #A bolt of lightning killed the rock.

There is something decidedly strange about these sentences. Toothbrushes can’tlove anything and rocks can’t be killed. These semantic criteria are calledselectional restrictions.


© Andrew Carnie

In the next section, we’ll look at the theory of thematic relations, whichis a particular way of representing selectional restrictions.

2.0 THEMATIC RELATIONS AND THETA ROLES

One way of encoding selectional restrictions is through the use of whatare called thematic relations . These are particular semantic terms that are usedto describe the role that the argument plays with respect to the predicate. Hereare some common thematic relations (this list is by no means exhaustive, and the

particular definitions are not universally accepted).

The initiator or doer of an action is called the agent. Agents should bealive and capable of volition. In the following sentence, Brad is an agent.

14) Brad hit Andrew

Not every sentence has an agent; there is no agent in the following twosentences. A falling rock is not alive and thus can’t be an agent. Some scholarslabel arguments like A falling rock as Natural Phenomena or non-volitionalagents. We won’t distinguish between these here. In (16) Nancy is not initiating

or doing an action (see the experiencer thematic relation below ).

15) A falling rock hit Terry.16) Nancy loves Terry

Agents must be capable of volition but they do not have to actually intentionallycause the action. In the following sentence. Michael is an agent, even though he

didn’t intentionally break the glass.

17) Michael accidentally broke the glassAgents are most frequently subjects, but they can also appear in other positions.

Arguments that feel or perceive events are called experiencers.Experiencers can appear in a number of argument positions including subject,

objects and indirect objects:


© Andrew Carnie

18) Keziah likes cookies

19) Becki saw the eclipse

20) Syntax frightens Jim

Entities that undergo actions, are moved, experienced or perceived are

called themes. Some authors also distinguish patients and percepts, but we willuse theme as a cover term for all of these.

21) Shelley kept her syntax book

22) The arrow hit Michael

23) The syntactian hates phonology

The entity towards which motion takes place is called a goal. Goals mayinvolve abstract motion.

24) Millie went to Chicago

25) Travis was given the pina colada mix.

There is a special kind of goal called recipient. Recipients appear when there is

an exchange of some kind. This only occurs with verbs that denote a change ofpossession.

26) Julie gave Jessica the book

27) Roy received a scolding from Sherilyn

The opposite of a goal is the source. This is the entity from which a motion

takes place

28) Bob gave Steve the Syntax assignment29) Stacy came directly from Sociolinguistics class.

The place where the action occurs is called the location.

30) Andrew is in Tucson's finest apartment

31) We're all at school

The object with which an action is performed is called the instrument:


© Andrew Carnie

32) Patrick hacked the computer apart with an axe

33) This key will open the door to the Douglass building

Finally, the one for whose benefit an event took place is called the benefactive.

34) He bought these flowers for Jason

35) She cooked Matt dinner.

Notice that any given DP can have more than one thematic relation. In the

following sentence, the DP Jason bears the thematic relations of agent andsource (at the very least).

36) Jason gave the books to Anna

There is not a one-to-one relationship between thematic relations and arguments.However, linguists have a special construct called a theta role (or θ role), that

does map one to one with arguments. Theta roles are bundles sets of thematic

relations that cluster on one argument. In (36) above, Jason gets two thematicrelations (agent and source), but only one theta role (the one that contains theagent and source thematic relations). Somewhat confusingly, syntacticians often

refer to particular theta roles by the most prominent thematic relation that theycontain. So you might hear a syntactician refer to the “agent theta role” of[DPJason]. Strictly speaking, this is incorrect: “Agent” refers to a thematicrelation, whereas the theta role is a bundle of thematic relations. But the practice

is common, so we’ll do it here. Remember, thematic relations are things likeagent, theme, goal etc. but theta roles are bundles of thematic relations assignedto a particular argument.

Let’s now see how we can uses these theta roles to represent the argumentstructure of a verb. Take a ditransitive verb like put. Put requires threearguments, a subject which must be an agent (the putter), a direct object, which

represents the theme (the thing being put) and an indirect object, whichrepresents a location or goal (the place where the theme is being put.) Anyvariation from this results in ungrammaticality:

37) John put the book on the table


© Andrew Carnie

38) *put the book on the table39) *John put the book40) *John put on the table

41) *John put the book the pen on the table42) *The rock put the sky with the fork

Examples (38)-(41), show that either having too many or two few argumentsresults in ungrammaticality. Example (42), shows that using DPs with the wrongtheta roles does the same (the rock can’t be an agent; the sky can’t be a theme –it can’t be put anywhere; and with the fork is an instrument, not a goal.) It

appears as if the verb put requires three arguments, which bear precisely thetheta roles of agent, theme and instrument. We represent this formally in termsof what is called a theta grid1.

43) 1 4 5

“put”

2SourceAgent

Theme Goal

3 i j k

This grid consists of several parts. First of all, we have the name of the predicate

(1). Next for each argument that the predicate requires, there is a column (withtwo rows). Each of these columns represents a theta role. Notice that a columncan have more than one thematic relation in it (but only one theta role!). The

number of columns corresponds exactly to the number of arguments thepredicate requires. The first row (2) tells you the names of the theta roles. Thesecond row (3), gives you what are called indices (singular: index) for each thetarole. When a predicate appears in an actual sentence, we mark the DP bearing

1 There are many ways to formalize theta grids, but I adopt here the indexingbox method that Haegeman (1991) uses, since it seems to be the mosttransparent.


© Andrew Carnie

the particular theta role with that index. Applying our grid to sentence (37), weget the following indexed sentence:

44) Johni put [the book]j on [the table]k.

The i index maps the agent theta role to John. The j index maps the theme theta

role to [the book] etc.

Theta roles actually come in two types. The first are external thetaroles (4). These are the ones assigned to the subject. They are usually indicated

by underlining the name of the theta role in the theta grid. The other kind areinternal theta roles (5). These are the theta roles assigned to the object andindirect object. There is a semantic reason for the distinction between internaland external theta roles (see Marantz 19XX for extensive discussion), but we

will leave that aside here. We will have use for the external/internal distinctionin chapter 9, when we do NP/DP movement. For now, however, you shouldsimply indicate which argument is the subject by underlining its name.

If you look carefully at the theta grid in (43), you’ll notice that it onlycontains specifier (subjects) and complements (direct object and indirect object).There are no adjuncts listed in the theta grid. Adjuncts seem to be entirely

optional:

45) John put the book on the table (with a pair of tongs) instrument

46) (In the class room) John put the book on the table location

This corresponds to our observation in chapter 5, that you can have as many oras few adjuncts as you like, but the number of complements and specifiers were

more restricted. Adjuncts are never arguments, and they never appear in theta

grids.

Up until now, we have been representing our grammar solely through

the mechanism of rules (Phrase structure, then X-bar rules). In order to stop X-bar rules from over generating, we are now going to use a new device. This is aconstraint (which uses theta grids). Constraints are like filters. They take theoutput of rules, and throw away any that don’t meet the constraints

requirements. In essence, we are going allow the X-bar rules to wildly


© Andrew Carnie

overgenerate, and produce ungrammatical sentences. Those sentences, however,will be thrown out by our constraint. The constraint we are going to use is calledthe Theta Criterion. The theta criterion ensures that there is a strict match

between the number and types of arguments in a sentence and the theta grid.

47) The Theta-Criterion

a. Each argument is assigned one and only one theta roleb. Each theta role is assigned to one and only one argument

This constraint requires that there is a strict one to one match between argument

DPs and theta roles. You can’t have more arguments than you have theta roles,and you can’t have more theta roles than you have NPs. Furthermore, since thetaroles express particular thematic relations, the arguments will have to be ofappropriate semantic types for the sentence to pass the constraint.

Let’s look at some examples to see how this works. Consider the verblove. It has the theta grid given in (48). I haven’t written in the indices here,

because we’ll add them when we compare the grid to a particular sentence.

48) “love”

Agent Theme

When a sentence containing the predicate love is produced, we apply indices toeach of the arguments, and match those arguments to theta roles in the grid. The

following is a grammatical sentence with the correct number of arguments. It ismatched to the theta grid in (50). There is a one to one matching betweenarguments and theta roles. So the theta criterion is satisfied, and the sentence is

allowed to surface.

49) Megani loves Kevinj

50) “love”

Agent Theme

i j

Contrast this with the ungrammatical sentence (51)


© Andrew Carnie

51) *Megani loves.

This sentence lacks a theme argument, as seen in the following theta grid:

52) “love”

Agent Theme

i

The theme theta role is not assigned to an argument (there is no index in itslower box). This violates the second condition of the Theta criterion: that every

theta role is assigned to an argument. There is not a one to one matching of thetheta roles to the arguments. Since the Theta criterion is violated, the sentence isfiltered out (marked as ungrammatical). Notice, our X-bar rules can generatethis sentence, it is ruled as ungrammatical by our constraint.

The next sentence shows the opposite problem: A sentence with toomany arguments.

53) *Megani loves Jasonj Kevink

54) “love”

Agent Theme

i j k

Here, the argument Kevin doesn’t get a theta role. There are only two theta roles

to be assigned, but there are three arguments. This violates the first part of theTheta Criterion: the requirement that every argument have a theta role. Again,the theta criterion filters out this sentence as ungrammatical.

To summarize, we can constrain the output of the X-bar rules using asemantic tool: theta roles. The Theta Criterion is a constraint or filter that rulesout otherwise well-formed sentences. The Theta criterion requires that there is a

strict one to one matching between the number and kind of theta roles and thenumber and kind of arguments.


© Andrew Carnie

3. THE LEXICON.

Let’s take a step back from these details and look at the big picture. We

have developed a model of grammar where we have three simple rules (the X-bar rules) that can generate a hierarchical constituent structure. These rules areconstrained by the theta criterion, which uses the semantic notion of theta roles.

Recall that our theory of syntax is meant to be a cognitive theory, so we mightask where these rules and these theta roles are stored in the mind. Chomskyclaims that the part of the mind devoted to language is essentially divided intotwo parts. One part, which he calls the computational component , contains all

the rules and constraints. This part of the mind does the work of buildingsentences and filtering out any ill-formed ones. The computational componentcan’t work in a vacuum, however. It needs access to information about thetaroles and the like. Chomsky claims that this information is stored in the

Lexicon, the other part of the human language faculty. The lexicon is yourmental dictionary or list of words (and their properties). If you think about it,this is the obvious place for theta roles to be stored. What theta roles are

assigned to which argument is a property of each predicate. It is informationthat must be associated with that predicate and that predicate only. The obviousplace to store information about particular words (ore more properly lexicalitems) is in the lexicon.

The lexicon contains all the irregular and memorized parts of language.Each lexical entry (dictionary entry) must contain at least the followinginformation):

Ø the meaning of the wordØ the pronunciation of the word

Ø exceptional information of all kindsØ the theta-grid (argument structure)

When you learn a new word, you memorize all this information.

On an abstract level we can diagram the grammatical system as lookingsomething like:


© Andrew Carnie

The Lexicon The Computational Component(theta roles) X-bar rules

Theta Criterion

Output

The lexicon feeds into the computational component, which then combineswords and generates sentences. The fact that lexical information affects the formof the sentence is formalized in what we call the projection principle:

55) The Projection Principle

Lexical information (like theta-roles) is syntactically represented at alllevels

4. EXPLETIVES AND THE EXTENDED PROJECTION PRINCIPLE

Before leaving the topic of the lexicon, there is one class of predicates,I’d like to point out two special classes of predicates. Consider first thefollowing “weather” verbs. These predicates don’t seem to assign any theta

roles:

56) It rained57) It snowed

58) It hailed

What theta role does the pronoun it get in these sentences? If you are having a

problem figuring this out, ask yourself what it refers to in the above sentences. Itappears as if it doesn’t refer to anything. In syntax we refer to pronouns like thisas expletive or pleonastic pronouns. These pronouns don’t get a theta role(which of course is a violation of the theta criterion – a point we will return to

below). The theta grid for weather verbs empty. They don’t assign any thetaroles.


© Andrew Carnie

Two kinds of it.

There are two it pronouns in English. One is the expletive found with

weather verbs. The other is the neuter pronoun it found in sentences

like:

i) It bit me on the leg.

If you contrast the it in (i) with the ones in the weather verbs, you’ll see

that the it in (i) does take a theta role (agent) and does refer to

something (probably an insect or some other animal). Not every

sentence with an it involves an expletive!

There is another class of predicates that take expletive pronouns. These

are predicates that can optionally take a CP subject:

59) That Bill loves chocolate is likely

The predicate is likely assigns one theta role. It takes one argument (the clause).(We will notate clausal arguments with the theta role Proposition.)

60) is likely

Proposition

You’ll note that in (60) the theta role is not underlined. This is because theclause bearing the theta role of proposition is a complement. This can be seen inthe following example:

61) It is likely that Bill likes chocolate.

In this sentence, we again have an expletive it, which gets no theta role.


© Andrew Carnie

In order to maintain the theta criterion, we need to account for theseNPs without theta roles. One thing we can observe about expletive pronouns isthat they only ever appear in subject position. Whenever an it appears in object

position, it takes a theta role:

62) I love it (it is a theme)

63) I put a book on it (it is a goal or location)

There are no object expletives. Expletives seem to appear where there is no thetamarked NP (or CP) that fills the subject position. This is encoded in a revised

version of the Projection Principle: The Extended Projection Principle (EPP).

64) Extended Projection Principle (EPP)All clauses must have subjects, Lexical Information is syntactically

represented

The EPP works like the theta criterion, it is a constraint on the output of the X-

bar rules. It requires that every sentence have a subject. We still have to accountfor the fact that expletives violate the theta criterion.

One way of doing this is by claiming that expletives are not generated

by the X-bar rules. Instead they are inserted by a special expletive insertion rule:

65) Expletive Insertion

Insert an expletive pronoun into the specifier of IP.

This rule applies when there is no other subject. If there is no theta markedsubject and no expletive subject, then the EPP will filter the sentence out. The

way in which we get around the theta criteria is by ordering the ExpletiveInsertion rule after the theta criterion has applied.


© Andrew Carnie


Theta Criterion (constraint)

Expletive Insertion

EPP (constraint)

Output

Since expletives are inserted after the theta criterion has applied, they can’t befiltered out by it.

The model we’ve drawn here is very preliminary. In the next chapter, we

will introduce a new kind of rule (the transformation – of which expletiveinsertion is a very special case) that will cause us to significantly revise thisdiagram.

5. SUMMARY

We started this chapter off with the observation that while X-bar rules capture

important facts about constituency and cross categorial generalizations, theyover generate (that is they generate ungrammatical sentences). One way ofconstraining X-bar theory is by invoking lexical restrictions on sentences, suchthat particular predicates have specific argument structures, in the form of Theta

Grids. The Theta Criterion rules out any sentence where the number and type ofarguments don’t match up one to one with the number and type of theta roles inthe theta grid.

We also looked at one apparent exception to the theta criterion: thetarole-less expletive pronouns. These pronouns only show up when there is noother subject, and are forced by the EPP. They escape the theta criterion bybeing inserted after the theta criterion has filtered out the X-bar rules.

By using lexical information (like theta roles) we’re able to stop the X-bar rules from generating sentences that are ungrammatical. Unfortunately, aswe’ll see in the next chapter, there are also many sentences that the X-bar rules

cannot generate. In order to account for these, we’ll introduce a furthertheoretical tool: the transformational rule.


© Andrew Carnie

IDEAS, RULES AND CONSTRAINTS INTRODUCED IN THIS CHAPTER

i) The predicate defines the relation between the individuals being talkedabout and the real world -- as well as with each other.

ii) The arguments are the individuals who are participating in the relation

iii) Argument StructureThe number of arguments that a predicate takes

iv) IntransitiveA predicate that takes only one argument

v) TransitiveA predicate that takes two arguments

vi) DitransitiveA predicate that takes three arguments

vii) Subcategorizational restrictionsRestrictions on the syntactic category of an argument

viii) Selectional restrictionsSemantic restrictions on arguments

ix) Thematic RelationsSemantic relations between a predicate and an argument – used as ameans of encoding subcategorizational & selectional restrictions.

x) AgentThe doer of an action (under some definitions must be capable ofvolition.)


© Andrew Carnie

xi) ExperiencerThe argument that perceives or experiences an event or state.

xii) ThemeThe element undergoing the action or change of state.

xiii) GoalThe end point of a movement

xiv) RecipientA special kind of goal, found with verbs of possession (eg give)

xv) SourceThe starting point of a movement

xvi) LocationThe place an action or state occurs

xvii) InstrumentA tool with which an action is performed

xviii) BenefactiveThe entity for whose benefit the action is performed

xix) Propositionthe thematic relation assigned to clauses.

xx) Theta RoleA bundle of thematic relations associated with a particular argumentNPs/DPs or CPs.

xxi) Theta gridThe schematic representation of the argument structure of a predicate,where the theta roles are listed. (see diagram (43))

xxii) External theta roleThe theta role associated with Subject NPs/DPs or CPs.


© Andrew Carnie

xxiii) Internal theta roleThe theta role associated with objects or indirect objects.

xxiv) The Theta-Criteriona. Each argument is assigned one and only one theta roleb. Each theta role is assigned to one and only one argument

xxv) Lexical ItemAnother way of saying “word”. A lexical item is an entry in the mentaldictionary.

xxvi) The Projection PrincipleLexical information (like theta-roles) is syntactically represented at alllevels

xxvii) Expletive (or Pleonastic) PronounsA pronoun (usually it or there), without a theta role. Only found in

subject position.

xxviii) Extended Projection Principle (EPP)All clauses must have subjects, Lexical Information is syntactically

represented

xxix) Expletive InsertionInsert an expletive pronoun into the specifier of IP.

xxx) The LexiconThe mental dictionary or list of words. Contains all irregular and

memorized information about language, including the argumentstructure (theta grid) of predicates.

xxxi) The Computational ComponentThe combinatorial, rule based, part of the mind. Where the rules andfilters are found.


© Andrew Carnie

xxxii) The Model


Theta Criterion (constraint)

Expletive Insertion

EPP (constraint)

Output

FURTHER READING:(to be fixed)GruberGuy who came up with Case grammar

Marantz (19XX)Haegeman’s textLevin (&Rapoport)Williams

PROBLEM SETS

1. SINHALA

(FIND SOURCE OF DATA)Two forms of the Sinhala verb appear in the data below and are identified in theglosses as A or B.

a) Provide a complete θ-grid for each of the verbs in the following data.


© Andrew Carnie

b) Indicate what theta role is assigned to what NP, ignore the NPs in squarebrackets [].

c)Discuss briefly (no more than 2 sentences) the distribution of the suffixes -t1aand -t1E.

d) In terms of θ-roles, what is the systematic relationship between the A and theB verb forms? Do not try to derive the morphological relationship. What isimportant is the thematic/syntactic differences between them.

1) miniha lameat1a potE denEwa

man child book give-A "The man gives the child the book"

2) lamea minihat1a polgediyE denEwa

child man coconut give-A "The child gives the man the coconut"

3) miniha lameat1a kata:wE kiyEnEwa

man child story tell-A

"The man tells the child the story."


© Andrew Carnie

4) miniha kawi kiyEnEwa

man poetry tell-A "The man recites poetry

5) minihat1E kawi kiyEwenEwa

man poetry tell-B "The man started reciting poetry (despite himself)"

6) lamea kata:wE ahanEwa

child story hear-A

"The child listens to the story"

7) lameat1E kata:wE æhenEwa

child story hear-B "The child hears the story

8) lamea nat1anEwa

child dance-A "The child dances"

9) lameat1E næ t1enEwa

child dance-B "The child dances (it can't help but do so)"

10) [hæmE irida mE] miniha [kolEmbE] yanEwa

every sunday emph man Columbo go-A "Every Sunday the man goes to Colombo"

11) [hæmE irida mE] minihat1E [kolEmbE] yanEwa

every sunday emph man Columbo go-B "Every Sunday the man finds himself going to Colombo

2 THE THETA CRITERION:(Based on Haegeman 1991)

What problems do each of the following sentences give for the thetacriterion (As a starting point, it may help to draw the theta grid for each verband show what NP gets what role). Please, not more than 3-4 sentences ofdiscussion per example!


© Andrew Carnie

1) As for John, I really don't like him2) (Italian) Ho visto Maria

have.1s seen Maria"I have seen Maria"

3) (French) Quel Livre Poirot a-t-il achetéwhat book Poirot has-he bought"What book has Poirot bought"

(compare: Quel livre a-t-il acheté what book has-he bought"What book has he bought")

3) Warlpiri

Consider the following data from Warlpiri (Data from Ken Hale)

1) Lungkarda ka ngulya-ngka nguna-mibluetongue Aux burrow-??? lie-non.past"The bluetongue skink is lying in the burrow"

2) Nantuwu ka karru-kurra parnka-mihorse Aux creek-??? run-non.past"The horse is running to the creek"

3) Karli ka pirli-ngirli wanti-miboomerang Aux stone-??? fall-non.past"the boomerang is falling from the stone"

4) kurdu-rlu ka-jana pirli yurutu-wana yirra-rnichild-??? Aux stone road-??? put.nonpast"the child is putting stones along the road"

What is the meaning of each of the affixes (suffixes) glossed with -???. Can yourelate them to Theta roles? Which ones?

chapter 7

Documents

extended projection principle

expletive insertion insert

external theta roles

chapter7 theta roles

expletive insertion epp

table john put

theme theta role

agent theta role