User:C4gw/sandbox

=C4 Milestone 2: Annotated Bibliography of Theta Criterion=

Administrative Communication
Updated 1:36AM, Oct. 1 -C4gw (talk) 08:37, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry. On further inquiry, this shouldn't be the right place. Please go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Theta_criterion

1970s
S Blansitt, Jr., Edward L. (1978). Stimulus as a semantic role. p. 311. Retrieved September 23, 2014. http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&lr=&id=chFgbuwW2SAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA311&dq=semantic+roles+linguistics&ots=p4KjBU2iOR&sig=fX5MPMoUGATSh9WMy7Wi57id1bU#v=onepage&q=semantic%20roles%20linguistics&f=false

In the article “Stimulus as a Semantic Role”, written by Edward L. BLansitt Jr., Blansitt uses the term semantic role, which refers to the term theta role. He then compares the use of roles such as experiencer, agent and patient from the perspectives of different researchers. “The nuclear role which co-occurs with experiencer in emotive experience predications has been called patient ([Wallace L.] Chafe), neutral ([John T.] Platt), instrument ([Charles J.] Fillmore), an goal ([Robert E.] Longacre) (Blansitt 211). Blansitt argues that the nuclear role co-occurring with emotive experiencer represents a separate sematic role that he refers to as stimulus. “The term ‘patient’ is used by Chafe (1970: 164) in a very broad sense: ‘Every sentence contains a patient or agent noun, if not both, unless the verb is in the exceptional ambient category’” (Blansitt, 314). It is important to know where the roles originated from to know how and why they came to the way we use the roles today. This work is biased from the Blansitt’s point of view, as at this time every author had their own way of determining semantic roles. I personally do not find this article particularly helpful for writing a Wikipedia article on Theta Criterion because there are may different perspectives all over the place in this article, which would confuse a reader who is trying to learn about Theta Criterion currently as opposed to in the 1970’s. Cadicksh92 (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

YJackendoff, R. (1972). Grammatical relations and functional structure. In Jackendoff, R. Semantic interpretation in generative grammar (pp. 25-46). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

1980s
Y Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

Remarks on the (theta)-Criterion and Case. Davis, Lori J. Linguistic Inquiry 17.3 (Jul 1986): 564-568. Retrieved from 

Subjects and the θ-Criterion. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 6.1 (Feb. 1988). Howard Lasnik. 1-17.

Theta theory and the syntax of applicatives in Chichewa (1988). http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00133903

1990s
Bošković, Ž. D-structure, theta-criterion, and movement into theta positions. Linguistic Analysis, 24:247-286(1994).

Trace Deletion, Θ-Roles, and Cognitive Strategies (1995). Y. Grodzinsky. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093934X85710723

Y Baker, Mark C. 1997. Thematic Roles and Syntactic Structure. In Liliane Haegeman, editor, Elements of Grammar: handbook in generative syntax.Boston; Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Pages 73-137

Hornstein, N. (1999). Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(1), 69-96. doi:10.1162/002438999553968

2000s
Tutunjian, D., & Boland, J. E. (2008). Do We Need a Distinction between Arguments and Adjuncts? Evidence from Psycholinguistic Studies of Comprehension. Language and Linguistic Compass, 2, 631-646. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00071.x
 * In the article “Do we Do We Need a Distinction between Arguments and Adjuncts? Evidence from Psycholinguistic Studies of Comprehension (2008).” researchers Tutunjian & Boland aim to settle the inter-theory discrepancy of creating a distinction between arguments and adjuncts or not. Because the Theta Criterion relies on and applies only to arguments, this article will be useful in helping briefly describe the notion of an argument. It will also provide useful as a way to make clear how an argument differs from an adjunct, thus making the idea of the Theta Criterion more clear for those with little knowledge of the subject. The work is conducted with a neutral point of view and later adopts support of the distinction between the two above notions after examining psycholinguistic evidence. While this article will be used only for a quick and simple explanation, I think it is an important distinction to note. Hannahjtalbot (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Integrating Verbs, Situation Schemas, and Thematic Role Concepts Todd R. Ferretti,Ken McRaef2,Andrea Hatherell. Journal of Memory and Language Volume 44, Issue 4, May 2001, Pages 516–547 DOI: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2728

Manzini, M. R., & Roussou, A. (2000). A minimalist theory of A-movement and control. Lingua, 110(6), 409-447. doi:10.1016/S0024-3841(00)00006-1

Reinhart, T. (2005). The lexicon-syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(3), 389-436. doi:10.1162/0024389054396881

Woolford, E. (2006). Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 37(1), 111-130. doi:10.1162/002438906775321175

2010-2014
Asudeh, A., & Toivonen, I. (2012). Copy raising and perception. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 30(2), 321-380. doi:10.1007/s11049-012-9168-2

Lauren, T. (2013). Acquisition of Theta Roles in Deaf Children with Cochlear Implants. http://hdl.handle.net/2104/8616

Laks, L. (2014). Morpho-thematic mismatches in hebrew: What happens when morphological and thematic criteria collide? Lingua, 138, 107-127. doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2013.10.011