Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:29:49.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Thematic Dependency and Semantic Interpretation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2016

William O’Grady
William O’Grady*
Affiliation:
University of Calgary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper is concerned with the formulation of a constraint on the set of NPs which can serve as “antecedent” for PRO and floated quantifiers. I will begin by showing that a principle formulated in terms of c-command encounters problems distinguishing between two classes of NPs occurring within PPs. I will then propose that a more comprehensive and successful constraint can be formulated in terms of thematic dependency, a relation holding between an NP and the lexical category which determines its thematic role.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , Summer 1985 , pp. 159 - 177
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bach, Emmon 1982 Purpose Clauses and Control. Pp. 35–58 in The Nature of Syntactic Representation. Jacobson, P. and Pullum, G., eds. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan 1982 The Passive in Lexical Theory. Pp. 3–86 in The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. Besnan, Joan, ed. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam 1981 Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Goodluck, H. 1981 Linguistic Principles in Children’s Grammar of Complement Subject Interpretation. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Hornstein, N. and Weinberg, A. 1981 Case Theory and Preposition Stranding. Linguistic Inquiry 12:55–92.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray 1977 Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray 1983 Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jaeggli, O. 1982 Topics in Romance Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Mansini, R. 1983 On Control and Control Theory. Linguistic Inquiry 14:421–447.Google Scholar
Marants, Alec 1984 Qn the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Miller, G. and Johnson, P.-Laird 1976 Language and Perception. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap.Google Scholar
O’Grady, William 1982a Remarks on Thematically Government Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 8:119–134.Google Scholar
O’Grady, William 1982b The Syntax and Semantics of Quantifier Placement. Linguistics 20:519–540.Google Scholar
Williams, E. 1980 Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 11:203–238.Google Scholar