Theories of argument structure: The connection between lexical information and syntactic structure

Antonio Fábregas

doi:10.7557/1.13.2.7834

Authors

Antonio Fábregas ISL, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7557/1.13.2.7834

Keywords:

theta roles, arguments, predicates, thematic hierarchy, Theta Criterion, UTAH, endo-skeletal approaches, exo-skeletal approaches

Abstract

This work discusses the different theories that have attempted to explain the relation between the lexical information provided by a predicate and the syntactic structures that introduce arguments. The focus of the article is in the different sets of assumptions and predictions made by endo-skeletal theories, where lexical items somehow condition the syntactic projection of arguments, and exo-skeletal theories, where lexical items must adapt their meaning to whichever argument structure syntax has defined. In doing so, the article reviews the Theta Criterion, the thematic hierarchy, the notion of linking, the syntactic and semantic decomposition of lexical verbs and the different types of theta role definitions from a formal semantic perspective.

References

Abusch, D. (1985). On Verbs and Time, Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Alexiadou, A. & F. Schäfer (2006). Instrument subjects are agents or causers. In D. Baumer, D. Montero, and M. Scanlon (eds.), Proceedings of the 25th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project, pp. 40-48.

Anderson, S. R. (1977). Comments on the Paper by Wasow. In P. Culicover, A. Akmajian & T. Wasow (eds.), Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp. 361-377.

Bach, E. (1979). Control in Montague Grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 10, pp. 515-531.

Baker, C. L. (1992). Review of S. Pinker: Learning and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Language 68, 402-413. https://doi.org/10.2307/416953

Baker, M. C. (1988). Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Baker, M. C. (1997). Thematic roles and syntactic structure. In L. Haegeman (ed.), Elements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 73-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_2

Baker, M. C. (2003). Lexical categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511615047

Barss, A. & H. Lasnik (1986). A Note on Anaphora and Double Objects. Linguistic Inquiry 17, pp. 347-354.

Beavers, J. (2011). On affectedness. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 29, pp. 335-370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9124-6

Beavers, J. & A. Koontz-Garboden (2013). In defense of the reflexivization analysis of anticausativization. Lingua 131, pp. 199-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.10.009

Belletti, A. & L. Rizzi (1988). Psych-Verbs and Theta-Theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 6, pp. 291-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133902

Bhat, D. N. S. (1977). Multiple Case Roles. Lingua 42, pp. 365-377. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(77)90105-X

Bierwisch, M. (1983). Semantische und Konzeptuelle Repräsentation Lexikalischer Einheiten. In W. Motsch & R. Rüzicka (eds.), Untersuchungen zur Semantik. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, pp. 61–99. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112709597-003

Bierwisch, M. (1986). On the Nature of Semantic Form in Natural Language. In F. Klix & H. Hangendorf (eds.), Human Memory and Cognitive Capabilities. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 765–783.

Bolinger, D. (1973). Ambient It Is Meaningful Too. Journal of Linguistics 9, pp. 261-270. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700003789

Borer, H. (2003). Exo-skeletal vs. endo-skeletal explanations: syntactic projections and the lexicon. In J. Moore & M. Polinsky (eds.), The nature of explanations in linguistic theory. Chicago: CSLI Publications, pp. 31-67.

Borer, H. (2005a). In name only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borer, H. (2005b). The natural course of events. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Borer, H. (2013). Taking form. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199263936.003.0008

Bosque, I. & J. Gutiérrez-Rexach (2009). Fundamentos de sintaxis formal. Madrid: Akal.

Bowers, J. (1993). The syntax of predication. Linguistic Inquiry 24, pp. 591-656.

Bresnan, J. (1982). The passive in lexical theory. In J. Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Burzio, L. (1981). Intransitive Verbs and Italian Auxiliaries, Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

Burzio, L. (1986). Italian Syntax: A Government-Binding Approach. Dordrecht: Reidel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7

Butt, M. (2006). Theories of Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139164696

Champollion, L. (2010). Parts of a whole: Distributivity as a bridge between aspect and measurement. PhD Dissertation. University of Pennsylvania.

Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on Nominalization. In R. Jacobs & P. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar. Waltham: Blaisdell Publishing, pp. 184-221.

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In Robert Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays in Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge (Mass.): The MIT Press, pp. 89-155.

Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In Michael Kentstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press, pp. 1-52. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4056.003.0004

Cuervo, M. C. (2003). Datives at large. PhD dissertation, MIT.

Davidson, D. (1967). The Logical Form of Action Sentences. In N. Rescher (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 81-95. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.13027259.6

Dixon, R. M. W. (1989). Subject and Object in Universal Grammar. In D. Arnold, D., M. Atkinson, J. Durand, C. Grover & L. Sadler (eds.), Essays on Grammatical Theory and Universal Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 91-118.

Dixon, R. M. W. (l982). The Grammar of English Phrasal Verbs. Australian Journal of Linguistics 2, pp. 1-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268608208599280

Dowty, D. R. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7

Dowty, D. R. (1989). On the semantic content of the notion 'thematic role'. In Barbara Partee, Gennaro Chierchia & Ray Turner (eds.), Properties, types and meanings, vol. II. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 69-130. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2723-0_3

Dowty, D. R. (1991). Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language 67, pp. 547-619. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1991.0021

Fábregas, A. (2021). Se in Spanish. Borealis 10, pp. 1-236. https://doi.org/10.7557/1.10.2.5934

Fillmore, C. J. (1966). A Proposal Concerning English Prepositions. In F.P. Dinneen, S.J. (ed.), Report of the Seventeenth Annual Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp. 19-34.

Folli, R. & H. Harley (2005). Consuming results in Italian and English: flavors of v. In P. Kempchinsky & S. Slabakova (eds.), Aspectual Inquiries. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 95-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3033-9_5

Folli, R. & H. Harley (2007). Causation, obligation and argument structure: on the nature of litte v. Linguistic Inquiry 38, pp. 197-238. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2007.38.2.197

Folli, R. & H. Harley (2008). Teleology and animacy in external arguments. Lingua 118, pp. 190-202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.004

Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Grimshaw, J. (1987). Unaccusatives: An Overview. NELS 17, pp. 244-259.

Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press,

Gruber, J. S. (1965). Studies in Lexical Relations, Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

Haegeman, L. (1995). Introduction to Government and Binding theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hale, K. & S. J. Keyser (1992). The Syntactic Character of Thematic Structure. In I. Roca (ed.), Thematic Structure: Its Role in Grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 107-143. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110872613.107

Hale, K. & S. J. Keyser (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (eds.), The View from Building 20. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press, pp. 53–109.

Hale, K. & S. J. Keyser (2002). Prolegomenon to a Theory of Argument Structure. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/5634.001.0001

Harley, H. (1995). Subjects, Events and Licensing. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

Harley, H. (1999). Denominal verbs and Aktionsart. In L. Pylkkänen, A. van Hout, & H. Harley (eds.), Papers from the UPenn/MIT Roundtable on the Lexicon. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 35. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT, pp. 73-85.

Harley, H. & R. Noyer (2000). Formal versus encyclopedic properties of vocabulary: evidence from nominalisations. In B. Peeters (ed.), The Lexicon-Encyclopedia interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1163/9780585474465_014

Hernanz, M. Ll. (1991). Spanish absolute constructions and aspect. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 1, pp. 75-128.

Horvath, J. & T. Siloni (2011). Anticausatives: against reflexivization. Lingua 121, pp. 2176-2186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.09.006

Jackendoff, R. S. (1975). Morphological and Semantic Regularities in the Lexicon. Language 51, pp. 639-671. https://doi.org/10.2307/412891

Jackendoff, R. S. (1983). Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Jackendoff, R. S. (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Jacobson, P. (1983). Grammatical Relations. Paper presented at the 1983 Winter meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Minneapolis, Minnesota.

Jacobson, P. (1987). Phrase Structure, Grammatical Relations and Discontinuous Constituents. In G. Huck and A. Ojeda (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 20: Discontinuous Constituency. New York: Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004373204_004

Kiparsky, P. (1997). Remarks on denominal verbs. In A. Alsina, J. Bresnan, & P. Sells (Eds.), Complex predicates Stanford: CSLI, pp. 473-499.

Koontz-Garboden, A. (2009). Anticausativization. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 27, pp. 77-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-008-9058-9

Kratzer, A. (1996). Severing the external argument from its verb. In J. Rooryck & L. Zaring (eds.), Phrase Structure and the Lexicon. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5

Lakoff, G. & J. R. Ross (1972). A Note on Anaphoric Islands and Causatives. Linguistic Inquiry 3, pp. 121-125.

Landau, I. (2010). The locative syntax of experiencers. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/8387.001.0001

Larson, R. K. (1988). On the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Inquiry 19, pp. 335-391.

Larson, R. K. (1990). Double Objects Revisited: Reply to Jackendoff. Linguistic Inquiry 21, pp. 589-632.

Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Levin, B. & M. Rappaport Hovav (1995). Unaccusativity. At the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface. Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press.

Levin, B. & M. Rappaport Hovav (2005). Argument realization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610479

Lieber, R. (1981). On the organization of the lexicon. Indiana: Indiana Linguistics Club.

Lohndal, T. (2014). Phrase structure and argument structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199677115.001.0001

Manzini, M. R. (1983). On control and control theory. Linguistic Inquiry 14, pp. 421-446.

Marantz, A. (1984). On the Nature of Grammatical Relations, Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Marantz, A. (1995). Cat as a phrasal idiom. Ms., MIT.

Marantz, A. (2013). Locality domains for contextual allomorphy across the interfaces. In A. Marantz & O. Matushansky (eds.), Distributed Morphology Today. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262019675.003.0006

Marelj, M. (2002). Middles in Dutch/English Type of Language. LINK 4, pp. 3-73.

Mateu, J. (2002). Argument Structure. Relational Construal at the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Ph.D. dissertation, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona.

Montague, R. (1970). Universal grammar. Theoria 36, pp. 373-398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-2567.1970.tb00434.x

Oehrle, R. T. (1976). The Grammatical Status of the English Dative Alternation, Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

Ostler, N. (1979). Case Linking: A Theory of Case and Verb Diathesis Applied to Classical Sanskrit. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

Parsons, T. (1990). Events in the Semantics of English. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Pensalfini, R. (2000). Encyclopedia-lexicon distinctions in Jingulu grammar. In B. Peeters (ed.), The Lexicon-Encyclopedia Interface. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 393-431. https://doi.org/10.1163/9780585474465_016

Perlmutter, D. M. (1978). Impersonal Passives and the Unaccusative Hypothesis. Berkeley Linguistic Society 4, pp. 157-189. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v4i0.2198

Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero Syntax: Experiencer and Cascades. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and Cognition: The Acquisition of Argument Structure. Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press.

Postal, P. M. (1982). Some Arc Pair Grammar Descriptions. In P. Jacobson & G. K. Pullum (eds.), The Nature of Syntactic Representation. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 341-425. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7707-5_9

Ramchand, G. (2008). First phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ramchand, G. (2018). Situations and syntactic structures. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/10911.001.0001

Randall, J. (2010). Linking. The Geometry of Argument Structure. Dordrecht: Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8308-2

Rappaport, M. (1983). On the Nature of Derived Nominals. In L. Levin, M. Rappaport, & A. Zaenen, (eds.), Papers in Lexical-Functional Grammar. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club, pp. 113-142.

Reinhart, T. (2000). The Theta System: Syntactic Realization of Verbal Concepts. OTS Working Papers in Linguistics. University of Utrecht.

Reinhart, T. (2002). The theta system: An overview. Theoretical Linguistics 28, pp. 229–290. https://doi.org/10.1515/thli.28.3.229

Reinhart, T. & T. Siloni (2005). The Lexicon-Syntax parameter: reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry 36, pp. 389-436. https://doi.org/10.1162/0024389054396881

Ruwet, N. (1991). Syntax and Human Experience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Saeed, J. I. (2016). Semantics. Oxford: John Wiley and sons.

Schäfer, F. (2008). The Syntax of (Anti-)Causatives. External Arguments in Change-of-state Contexts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/la.126

Schäfer, F. (2009). The causative alternation. Language and Linguistics Compass 3, pp. 641-681. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00127.x

Speas, M. (1990). Phrase Structure in Natural Language. Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2045-3

Tenny, C. (1987). Grammaticalizing Aspect and Affectedness, Doctoral dissertation, MIT.

Tenny, C. (1992). The Aspectual Interface Hypothesis. In I.A. Sag and A. Szabolcsi (eds.), Lexical Matters, CSLI Lecture Notes 24. Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University, pp. 1-27.

Tenny, C. (1994). Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1150-8

Travis, L. (2010). Inner aspect. Dordrecth: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8550-4

van Riemsdijk, H. & E. Williams (1986). Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press.

Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and Times. Philosophical Review 56, pp. 143-160. https://doi.org/10.2307/2182371

Vendler, Z. (1972). Res Cogitans: A n Essay in Rational Psychology. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Wasow, T. (1977). Transformations and the Lexicon. In P. Culicover, A. Akmajian & T. Wasow (eds.), Formal Syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp. 327-360.

Wood, J. & A. Marantz (2017). The interpretation of external arguments. In R. D'Alessandro, Irene Franco et al. (eds.), The verbal domain. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 255-278. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198767886.003.0011

Zaenen, A., J. Maling and H. Thráinsson (1985). Case and Grammatical Functions: The Icelandic Passive. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, pp. 441-483. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133285