Structural Subject and Thematic Subject

1988 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 397-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giorgio Graffi

In the tradition of generative grammar, two different definitions of "subject" have been proposed: we name the first one "structural", since it is based on the constituent structure of the sentence, and the second one "thematic", because it makes use of the concept of thematic role. We argue that both definitions are necessary, since they deal with two different entities, i.e. the structural subject and the thematic subject, which are to be kept distinct. In particular, we show that opacity phenomena are induced by the "thematic" subject, and not by the "structural" one (in showing this, we make use of the notion of "Complete Functional Complex" recently proposed by Chomsky); this kind of analysis allows us to dispense with the so-called "i-within-i condition", which appears theoretically unsound. Some cases of behavior of anaphors which seem to run against our proposal are also discussed, and it is shown that they can be accounted for on the basis of independent principles.

2011 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 991-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
KATHERINE MESSENGER ◽  
HOLLY P. BRANIGAN ◽  
JANET F. McLEAN

ABSTRACTWe report a syntactic priming experiment that examined whether children's acquisition of the passive is a staged process, with acquisition of constituent structure preceding acquisition of thematic role mappings. Six-year-olds and nine-year-olds described transitive actions after hearing active and passive prime descriptions involving the same or different thematic roles. Both groups showed a strong tendency to reuse in their own description the syntactic structure they had just heard, including well-formed passives after passive primes, irrespective of whether thematic roles were repeated between prime and target. However, following passive primes, six-year-olds but not nine-year-olds also produced reversed passives, with well-formed constituent structure but incorrect thematic role mappings. These results suggest that by six, children have mastered the constituent structure of the passive; however, they have not yet mastered the non-canonical thematic role mapping. By nine, children have mastered both the syntactic and thematic dimensions of this structure.


Linguistics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagobert Höllein

Valency theory is a grammatical theory which focuses on the verb or the predicate as its center. Modern valency theory was founded in 1959 by Lucien Tesnière and is based on the idea that verbs structure sentences by binding specific elements (complements, actants) as atoms do. Other, freely addable elements are not determined by the verb; these are called supplements, adjuncts, or circonstants. The basic items of valency theory are valency carriers, complements, and supplements. Take for example sentence (1), “He gives the book to Sandra in the library.” While the NPs He and the book and the PP to Sandra in sentence (1) are valency governed complements, the PP in the library is not governed. It is a supplement. Tesnière compares sentences to a stage play, with actors and requisites. The verb is considered the central valency carrier and the complements depend on the valency carrier. In contrast to other projective theories of grammar, such as generative grammar, the binary division of the sentence into subject and predicate is abolished: the prime element of a sentence is the verb, the subject is governed by the verb, and so are the other objects. In valency theory the number of complements that depend on the verb constitutes its valency. There are monovalent (run), bivalent (build), and trivalent verbs (give). The verb run requires a subject to form a minimal sentence and to communicate a scenario, build requires a subject and direct object for this purpose, give a subject, direct, and indirect object. But it is not necessary that every complement be realized. For instance, sentence (2): “He sold the car (to his neighbor)”. A trivalent verb like to sell can easily be realized with only two complements, as shown in example (2). Complements like the directive complement in (2) (called facultative complements) and supplements differ by the fact that complements are determined in their form (syntactic valency) and their meaning (semantic valency) by the valency carrier, while supplements such as temporal or local adjuncts are not. The ability of a valency carrier to determine formal aspects like case marking of its complement(s) is subsumed under syntactic valency and the ability to determine semantic aspects like its thematic role is called semantic valency/specificity. Acknowledgements: For discussion of the material in this article and notes, the author is grateful to Vilmos Ágel, Klaus Fischer, and the reviewers.


Author(s):  
Yoonsang Song ◽  
Ryan K. Y. Lai

Abstract The current study explores the nature of constituent-structure-independent structural priming across the two languages of bilinguals. Specifically, this study tests whether such cross-linguistic priming involves the priming of functional-level syntactic representations shared between the languages, which can be distinguished from the priming of mainly non-syntactic information (e.g., information structure, thematic-role order). Critical prime sentences consisted of Cantonese actives in the Object-Subject-Verb (OSV) order and passives where the patient was grammatically topicalized with the same topic particle. Target responses were produced in English actives or passives. The results show that robust priming from Cantonese Topic-Passives to English passives occurred, but no cross-linguistic priming was observed for Cantonese Topic-OSV active primes. The Topic-OSV active and Topic-Passive constructions share information structure, and are formed in different constituent structures from English actives and passives. Therefore, the robust cross-linguistic passive priming by Topic-Passive primes should in large part be ascribed to functional-level syntactic representations of passive constructions shared by Cantonese and English.


Author(s):  
A. C. Enders

The alteration in membrane relationships seen at implantation include 1) interaction between cytotrophoblast cells to form syncytial trophoblast and addition to the syncytium by subsequent fusion of cytotrophoblast cells, 2) formation of a wide variety of functional complex relationships by trophoblast with uterine epithelial cells in the process of invasion of the endometrium, and 3) in the case of the rabbit, fusion of some uterine epithelial cells with the trophoblast.Formation of syncytium is apparently a membrane fusion phenomenon in which rapid confluence of cytoplasm often results in isolation of residual membrane within masses of syncytial trophoblast. Often the last areas of membrane to disappear are those including a desmosome where the cell membranes are apparently held apart from fusion.


Author(s):  
Eni Maharsi

This paper examines the role of elements of English sentences by employing the approach ofthematic role assignment. The emphasis is on how the positioning of words and phrases insyntactic structure helps determine the roles that the referents of NPs play in the situationdescribed by the sentences. The results reveal that the position of an NP’s determines itsthematic role and. There is a relevance between deep syntactic structure and the assignmentof thematic roles for every NP in the sentence.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 5-10
Author(s):  
Gianina Iordăchioaia ◽  
Elena Soare

Nominalization has been at the forefront of linguistic research since the early days of generative grammar (Lees 1960, Vendler 1968, Lakoff 1970). The theoretical debate as to how a theory of grammar should be envisaged in order to capture the morphosyntactic and semantic complexity of nominalization, initiated by Chomsky’s (1970) Remarks on nominalization, is just as lively today, after five decades during which both the empirical scope and the methodology of linguistic research have seen enormous progress. We are delighted to be able to mark this occasion through our collection, next to the anniversary volume Nominalization: 50 Years on from Chomsky’s Remarks, edited by Artemis Alexiadou and Hagit Borer, soon to appear with Oxford University Press.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document