SYNTAX

CONSTRAINING X-BAR:
THETA THEORY
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 2

Learning Objectives
• After reading this chapter, you should walk away having mastered
the following ideas and skills:
• 1) Distinguish between thematic relation and theta role.
• 2) Identify the thematic relations agent, theme, etc.
• 3) Explain how X-bar theory over-generates.
• 4) Explain the structure of the lexicon.
• 5) Draw the theta grids for a predicate.
• 6) Apply the theta criterion to a sentence as a filter to X-bar theory.
• 7) Distinguish sentences with expletive subjects from ones with
theta-role-bearing subjects.
• 8) Explain the Extended Projection Principle and how it accounts
for expletives.
• 9) Explain the ordering of the EPP with the theta criterion in the
context of the model we are developing.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 3

Overgeneration
• X-bar theory overgenerates:
• It appears to be a property of
the particular verb involved.
The lexical information
determines what items can
be present.
• Information about the
particular properties of verbs
is contained in our mental
dictionary or lexicon (some
Vs don’t require objects,
others require 1 or 2, etc.).
• So, we can use the
lexicon/lexical information
to constrain X-bar theory so
• Traci gave John a gift. that it doesn’t overgenerate /
• *Traci gave John. doesn’t predict the existence
• *Traci gave a gift. of ungrammatical sentences.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 4

Basic Terminology
• The mental dictionary/the lexicon is the store of information about
particular words:
• Pronunciation of words
• Morphological irregularities
• Meaning of words
• Requirements about other words they occur with
• Two restrictions: 2. Selectional/semantic restrictions
1. Subcategory is one piece of info on what can appear in particular
positions.
that must be stored with the lexical item
• a. #My comb hates raisins.
• b. #A bolt of lightning killed the rock.
• Combs can’t hate anything and rocks
can’t be killed (semantically strange).
• These semantic criteria are called
selectional restrictions. They limit
the semantic properties of arguments.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 5

Thematic Relations
• One way of encoding SELECTIONAL restrictions is
through the use of thematic relations.
• These are particular semantic terms that are used to
describe the role that the argument plays with respect to
the predicate (semantic relation between the argument and
the predicate).
• Agent: the initiator, causer or doer of an action
• a) Ryan hit Andrew.
• b) A falling rock hit Jerry.
• c) Michael accidentally broke the glass.
• Agents are most frequently subjects, but they can also
appear in other positions.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 6

Thematic Relations
• Theme (also patient): the entity that undergoes actions, is moved,
experienced or perceived
• Susana loves cookies
• A falling rock hit Terry.
• The syntactician bought a phonology textbook.
• Goal: The entity towards which motion/movement takes place. Goals
The preposition ‘to’ is a marking goal
may involve abstract motion. Travis is the end point of the giving action
The syntactician is where the phonology textbook ends up
• Millie went to Chicago. Terry is the theme and goal of where the rock hits
• Travis was given a semantics article.
• The syntactician bought a phonology textbook.
• A falling rock hit Terry.
• Recipient is a special kind of goal; Recipients only occur with verbs
that denote a change of possession.
• Julie gave Jessica the book.
• Roy received a scolding from Hanna.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 7

Thematic Relations
• Experiencer: the argument that experiences or receives the event
• a) Tom likes cookies. (subject)
• b) Lorenzo saw the eclipse. (subject)
• c) Syntax frightens Kenny. (object)
• Experiencers have to be associated with verbs of emotion (love, hate, etc.),
perception (see, perceive, hear, taste, feel, smell, etc.), or cognition (know,
understand, frighten, etc.).
• However, Terry in (d/e) and the wall in (f) are not experiencers.
• d) The rock fell on Terry
• e) A falling rock hit Terry
• f) The car hit the wall
• In the sentence The rock fell on Terry, does Terry experience the event? Of
course, he does, but he’s not an “experiencer” in the technical sense we are
using here. If so, what about the wall in The car hit the wall?
• We want to limit the experiencer thematic relation to entities that can
experience events, and only with predicates where the experience is a critical
part of the meaning of the verbs of emotion, perception and cognition.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 8

Thematic Relations
• Source is the opposite of goal; this is the entity from which movement
originates. (The most classic sources are marked with the preposition ‘from’ )
• Stacy came directly from sociolinguistics class. Bob is where the syntax
assignment came from
• Bob gave Steve the syntax assignment.
• Location: Place where action occurs.
• Andrew is in Tucson’s finest apartment. Prepositions ‘in’, ‘on’, ‘at’ are
• We’re all at school. often examples of locations.

• Is there a water supply on the island? // a store on Fifth Avenue

• Instrument: The entity/object with which an action is performed.
Instruments are often marked
• Chris hacked the computer apart with an axe. with the preposition ‘with’
• This key will open the door to the linguistics building.
• Beneficiary: the one/entity for whose benefit an event took place.
• He bought these flowers for Jason.
Beneficiary is often marked
• She cooked Matt dinner. with the preposition ‘for’
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 9

Theta Roles
• Thematic relations are purely semantic relations.
• Theta (θ) roles are bundles of thematic relations associated with a
particular (one) argument; they are about syntactic positions.
• Thematic relation # theta role
• An argument can have multiple thematic relations (agent and source),
but only one theta role (the one that contains the agent and source
thematic relations). There is one theta role for ‘Brian’
and that’s the first box containing
agent and source; there is a second
theta role for ‘doorknob’ and that’s
the second box (theme), and a
third theta role for ‘Mary’ and
that’s the third box containing the
recipient and goal.
→ Theta roles line up with
argument positions
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 10

Theta Roles
• One-to-one match of theta roles and arguments:
• ‘place’ requires 3 arguments: an agent (the placer), a theme (the thing
being placed), and a location/goal (the thing on which the theme is
being placed). Any variation from this results in ungrammaticality:
• a) John placed the flute on the table.
• b) *placed the flute on the table. no agent
• c) *John placed the flute. no location
• d) *John placed on the table. no theme
the location has to be expressed in a
• e) *John placed the flute the table.
prepositional phrase
• f) *John placed the flute the violin on the table. 2 themes
• g) John placed [the flute and the violin] on the table. conjoined themes
• h) *The rock placed the sky with the fork. the wrong types of arguments,
‘the rock’ cannot be an agent; the sky can’t be a theme; and ‘with the fork’ is an
instrument rather than a location/goal
Having too many, too few or the wrong types of arguments results in ungrammaticality.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 11

Theta Grids
• How do we code this?
• Lexical entries of the verb ‘place’, for example, show pieces of
information stored in the lexicon, dictating that such a verb requires
three arguments, that bear precisely the theta roles of agent (DP),
theme (DP), and goal (PP).
• We represent this formally in terms of what is called a theta grid.
• For each argument the predicate requires,
there is a column (with 2 rows). Each of
these columns represents a theta role.
• The number of columns corresponds
exactly to the number of arguments the
predicate requires.
• The first row tells you the thematic
relations and the categories associated with
each of these theta roles. The second row
gives you indices for each theta role.
[John]i placed [the flute]j [on the table]k • The external theta role is the one assigned
to the subject. The internal theta roles are
Adjuncts aren’t included in theta grids!! assigned to the object and indirect object.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 12

Theta Criterion
• In order to stop X-bar rules from over-generating, we need a
constraint (theta criterion). Constraints are like filters.
• The theta criterion requires that there is a strict one-to-one
match between arguments 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
arguments.
• A sentence meets the “Theta Criterion ” iff:
• a) Every argument must have one and only one theta role.
• b) Every theta role must be assigned (indexed) to one and
only one argument.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 13

Theta Criterion
• a) Megani loves Kevinj.
b) *Megani loves.
The sentence in (a) is grammatical The sentence lacks a theme argument, as
with the correct number of arguments. seen in the following theta grid:
It is matched to the theta grid below:

The theme theta role is not assigned to an

This sentence meets the theta criterion as
argument (there is no index in its
every argument has a theta role: ‘Megan’ has
lower box). This violates the second condition
the ‘experiencer’ and ‘Kevin’ has the ‘theme’
of the theta criterion: Every theta role is
And every theta role is assigned to an
assigned to an argument. There is not a one-to-
argument: the ‘experiencer’ is assigned to
one matching of the theta roles to the
‘Megan’ and the ‘theme’ is assigned to
arguments in this sentence. Since the theta
‘Kevin’
criterion is violated, the sentence is filtered out
There is a one-to-one matching between
(marked as ungrammatical). Notice, our X-bar
arguments and theta roles. So, the theta
rules can generate this sentence; it is ruled
criterion is satisfied, and the sentence is
ungrammatical by our constraint.
allowed to pass through the filter.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 14

Theta Criterion
• c) *Megani loves Jasonj Kevink.
• This sentence shows the opposite problem: A sentence with two
many arguments.

• Here, the argument Kevin doesn’t get a theta role. There are
only 2 theta roles to be assigned, but there are 3 arguments.
• This violates the first part of the theta criterion: the requirement
that every argument must have a theta role.
• The theta criterion filters out this sentence as ungrammatical.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 15

Expletives and the EPP

• NPs without theta roles:
• Weather verbs predicates don’t seem to assign any theta roles.
• a) It rained
These are called expletives or
• b) It snowed
pleonastics
• c) It hailed
• What does it refer to in the above sentences?
• It appears as if it doesn’t refer to anything.
• These expletive or pleonastic pronouns don’t get a theta role (which
of course is a violation of the theta criterion.
• The theta grid for weather verbs is empty. They don’t assign any theta
roles.
• Expletive pronouns usually appear in subject position. When it appears
in other positions, it usually bears a theta role:
• d) I love it. (it is a theme)
• e) I put a book on it. (it is a goal or location)
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 16

Expletives and the EPP

• Expletives seem to appear where there is no theta marked DP (or CP)
that fills the subject position.
• Extended Projection Principle (EPP):
• All clauses must have subjects (i.e. the specifier of TP must be filled
by a DP or CP).
• The EPP works like the theta criterion. It is a constraint on the output
of the X-bar rules.
 EL KEMMA_Constraining X-bar_Theta Theory 17

Thank you