Grammar I

LV/ JVG

Graciela Palacio
2014 (revised 2015)

LESSON 8:
SEMANTIC OR THEMATIC ROLES
The verb is the most important element in a sentence because it determines the number of
elements that go with it. Haegeman (1991) compares the verb to the script of a play, in the
sense that its meaning determines the number of actors or participants needed to represent its
meaning. In the same way as actors in a play are assigned roles, the verb also assigns roles to
its arguments. These roles are semantic roles. For example, in the sentence:
The man killed the bear.
the man is described as the agent (i.e. the entity that performs the action that causes the bear
to be dead) and the bear is the patient (i.e. the entity affected).
Technically speaking, these roles are called thematic roles or theta roles. Now linguists do
not agree with respect to the type and number of theta roles that should be recognised. We
will first consider the most common thematic roles that we find in the literature on the
subject.
1) Agent:
The agent has to be an animate being. It is the causer of the happening denoted by the
verb, the doer of the action. An element of volition or causation is present. Notice that
agents combine with dynamic verbs, it is not possible to have a doer of an action if there is
no action:
Margaret is mowing the grass.
The gamekeeper wounded him.
Jack fell down on purpose. (on purpose: volitional adverbial).
Verbs of attention (look, listen, smell, taste, and feel) take agentive subjects, for example:
I'm looking at some photographs.
We listened carefully but heard nothing.
(You) Smell this and tell me what it is.
He tasted the soup to see if he had put enough salt in it.
She felt the material to see if it was soft enough for the baby.
2) External Causer:
The unwitting (= unintentional) cause of an event. It is generally inanimate, e.g.:
The avalanche destroyed several houses.
The electric shock killed him.
3) Experiencer:
The living entity that experiences something. Experiencer subjects occur with stative verbs
and adjectives. They contrast with agents and causers. We find experiencer subjects with:

Page 1 of 8/ Lesson 8

a) verbs and adjectives that express emotions (modality verbs and modality adjectives
expressing volition), e.g.:
Modality verbs expressing volition:
Tom liked the play.
We respect the truth.
Everyone hates John.
Mary envies Johns talent.
Angie loves French films.
Modality adjectives expressing volition:
The workers are angry.
Tom is unhappy.
b) verbs and adjectives that express knowledge, belief or expectation (modality verbs and
modality adjectives expressing cognition)
Modality verbs expressing cognition:
He knows the truth.
Jane believed the story.
Modality adjectives expressing cognition:
I'm aware that he has done it.
Tom was sure that Mary had done it.
c) verbs of perception (see, hear, smell, taste, feel), which contrast with verbs of
attention:
I can see somebody at the door.
Did you hear him go out?
Can you taste the garlic in this stew?
I could smell (that) he had been smoking.
I feel disappointed.
4) Patient:
The entity that exists before the action is performed and that is affected by it.
Norman smashed a window in his father's car.
I'm digging the ground.
I baked some potatoes.
The fish is frying.
The fish is being fried. (passive sentence)
5) Resultant:
The entity that does not exist before the action is performed but which is the result of that
action.
I'm digging a hole.
Baird invented television.

Page 2 of 8/ Lesson 8

John has painted a new picture.

6) Theme:
a) the entity located somewhere:
The pencil was on the table.
The pencil was lying on the table.
b) The abstract entity that is metaphorically located in someones mind. An abstract entity
may be an idea, a thought or a belief:
John believes that Mary is clever.
Bill thinks that Lucy is pretty.
We will refer to this role as theme/proposition in the sense that the idea, belief, etc.,
expresses a proposition that can be said to be true or false, i.e. that can be assigned a
truth value. Notice that in this case the argument is not a determiner phrase but a noun
clause, something like a sentence but within another sentence. It is called a clausal
argument.
c) the entity that undergoes motion. In this case, the verb must be dynamic, a verb of
motion:
John went to the cinema.
Jack fell down. (accidentally)
The ball rolled down the hill.
John put the book on the table.
We rolled the ball down the hill.
d) the entity characterised, especially if there is an adjective after the verb be, e.g.:
The boy is clever.
That restaurant is expensive.
In this case, the subject can also be viewed as an entity located somewhere, an entity
located in a certain set, in the sentences above the set of clever people or the set of
expensive things.
7) Instrument:
The entity (generally inanimate) which an agent uses to perform an action or instigate a
process. Notice that the preposition with appears in the paraphrase:
A stone broke his glasses. (Somebody broke his glasses with a stone)
A gun wounded him. (Somebody wounded him with a gun)
The computer has solved the problem. (Somebody has solved the problem with a
computer)
We employ a computer for our calculations. (We do our calculations with a computer)
He nodded his head. (He said "yes" with his head)

Page 3 of 8/ Lesson 8

He shook his head. (He said "no" with his head)

8) Recipient or Goal
I gave Martha the money.
I gave the money to Martha.
I told Martha the truth.
Tom was given a radio. (notice that this sentence is in the passive voice)
The label goal can also be used as a synonym of destination with verbs such as go or take:
John took the children to the park.
John went to the station.
9) Beneficiary (or Intended Recipient):
She made Bill a cake. (She made a cake for Bill)
I cooked him some sausages. (I cooked some sausages for him)
In this case, the paraphrase is with the preposition for.
10) Locative:
The argument denotes a place or location. The sentence can sometimes be paraphrased by
means of the word there (existential there), e.g.:
Los Angeles is foggy. (There is fog in Los Angeles)
This jar contains coffee. (There is coffee in this jar)
My tent sleeps four people. (Four people can sleep in my tent)
Tom has my notes. (Where are my notes?)
She swam the river. (She swam across the river)
The horse jumped the fence. (The horse jumped over the fence)
He passed a cyclist. (He passed by a cyclist)
Notice that in the paraphrases given above there is always a prepositional phrase that
expresses location.
11) Source:
The entity from which something moves, typically introduced by the preposition from:
John returned from Paris.
12) Eventive:
The argument denotes an event. Event nouns (i.e. demonstration, arrival, lesson, party,
mass, rally, etc.) are related to dynamic verbs that also denote events. They are abstract
nouns.

Page 4 of 8/ Lesson 8

The meeting was yesterday.

The match is tomorrow.
The Norman invasion was in 1066.
THETA GRIDS
We said before that the meaning of a verb determines the number of actors or participants that
will be needed if we want to represent its meaning. We also said that the verb assigns
semantic roles to its arguments and that technically speaking these roles are called thematic
roles or theta roles. The number and type of roles that a verb assigns to its arguments is
represented by means of a grid called theta-grid. The semantic analysis of a sentence will
have to include everything we have seen plus the theta grid. Lets consider some examples:
The rioters smashed a shop window.
Semantic analysis:
Predicator: smash (two-place verb)
Arguments: the rioters, a shop window
Argument structure of smash: <1, 2>
Theta-grid of smash: <agent, patient>
Proposition: dynamic. The rioters caused the shop window to change its state.
Bill took the children to the zoo.
Semantic Analysis:
Predicator: take (three-place verb)
Arguments: Bill, the children, to the zoo
Argument structure of take: <1, 2, 3 >
Theta-grid of take: <agent, theme, goal>
Proposition: dynamic. The sentence can be paraphrased as Bill caused the children to be at
the zoo.
Note 1: we will write the theta-grid of the verb immediately after the argument structure
because there is a correlation between the number of arguments and the number of theta-roles
that the verb can assign. (cf. the theta-criterion discussed below)
NOUNS, ADJECTIVES AND PREPOSITIONS AS THETA-ROLE ASSIGNERS
Lexical verbs are not the only elements that assign theta-roles. Nouns, adjectives and
prepositions are also theta-role assigners. Consider the following example:
The enemy destroyed the city.
The verb destroy is a two-place verb. It takes two arguments (the enemy and the city) and
only one complement (the city). The verb destroy assigns a theta-role to each, the role of
agent to the enemy and the role of patient to the argument that functions as complement, i.e.
the city. If the sentence is nominalized and becomes part of a larger structure as in:
The enemys destruction of the city occurred at dawn.
the noun destruction will also assign two theta roles to its arguments the enemy and the city,
the same theta roles as the verb destroy.

Page 5 of 8/ Lesson 8

Consider now the following pair of sentences:

I consider [that the book is expensive.]
I consider [the book expensive.]
The verb consider is a two-place verb, it has two arguments (I and that the book is expensive)
and it assigns a theta role to each, I being an experiencer and that the book is expensive a
theme/ proposition. Within the second argument, which is a complement, the book gets the
theta-role of theme from expensive. The same happens in the second sentence, where there is
no verb be.
Finally consider the following example:
The book is on the table.
Here the predicator is the preposition on. It takes two arguments (the book and the table).
When the preposition on combines with the determiner phrase the table it transforms an
object, the table, into a place or projected area. The book receives the role of theme from the
prepositional phrase on the table.
THE THETA-CRITERION
The number of theta roles that a predicate has to assign determines the number of arguments
that a predicate takes. The one-to-one relation between thematic roles and arguments is
referred to as the theta-criterion. The Theta-criterion states:
a. Each argument must be associated with one and only one theta-role.
b. Each theta role must be associated with one and only one argument.
IN WHAT WAY ARE THETA ROLES USEFUL?
Sometimes theta roles help us decide which the syntactic units of the sentence are. Take for
example the sentence I think Mary pretty. Think is a two-place verb which has two theta-roles
to assign, experiencer to its subject and theme/proposition to its complement, in the sense that
somebody thinks something. It is not that I think Mary. We dont think people. What we
have is an idea located in our mind. What I think is that Mary is pretty.
THE VERB CONSIDER
Lets discuss the following sentences:
John considered the problem.
John considered the problem difficult.
In the two sentences consider is a two-place verb, which takes two arguments and one
complement. There are, however, two verbs consider. The difference lies:
a) first, in the type of complement that the verb takes. In the first sentence, the
complement is a determiner phrase (the problem), whereas in the second sentence the
complement is a small or verbless clause (the problem difficult), a small clause being
a structure of predication without a verb (i.e. difficult is predicated of the problem)
b) secondly, in the meaning. In the first sentence, consider is a dynamic verb which
means give attention to or think about something in order to make a decision. The
two theta-roles that it assigns are agent and theme. John is an agent because it is

Page 6 of 8/ Lesson 8

animate and it performs the action voluntarily. In the second sentence, however,
consider means think or have the opinion. It is a stative verb and the theta roles
that it assigns are experiencer and theme/ proposition. The idea is the abstract object
located in Johns mind. The second theta role is assigned to the whole unit the
problem difficult. It is not that John thought the problem, John thought that the
problem was difficult.
Rothstein (1995) notes that we can say John considers that problem difficult, even though he
has never considered the problem (itself) at all.
THETA-ROLE ASSIGNMENT
Consider the following sentences:
1. John kicked the bucket. (cf. Juan pate el balde) (literal meaning)
2. John kicked the bucket. (cf. Juan estir la pata) (idiom)
In the first sentence the verb kick assigns first a theta role to the bucket, the theta-role of
affected participant or patient. Then the two together, i.e. kick + the bucket, will assign a
theta-role to John, the role of agent.
In the second sentence kick the bucket means die so the theta-role that John receives from the
idiom is not agent but affected participant or theme (in the sense that it is an entity that
undergoes motion, it goes from the state of being alive to the state of being dead).
Consider these other examples:
3. John threw a party. (John is an agent)
4. John threw a fit. (John is an affected participant) (cf. Tuvo un ataque de nervios)
TO SUM UP:
The predicator first assigns a theta-role to the argument that follows it and then the two
elements together (i.e. compositionally) assign a theta role to the subject.
Lesson 8 Activity 1: (to be discussed in class)
Do the semantic analysis of the following sentences:
1. The man made a fire.
2. John gave Peter a radio.
3. Peter was given a radio. (Passive sentence)
4. He gave the door a kick.
5. The demonstration was yesterday.
6. Tom was sure that Mary had stolen the money. (Here there are two predicators)
Lesson 8 Activity 2: (to be discussed in class)
Account for the ungrammaticality of:
1. *John believed what I said but Mary didnt do so.
2. *John carefully knew Greek.
3. *Yesterday it was my birthday.
Lesson 8 Activity 3: (To be handed in as Assignment 8)
Do the semantic analysis of the following sentences:

Page 7 of 8/ Lesson 8

1.
2.
3.
4.

We loved the film.

We went to the theatre yesterday.
John was working at that time.
She knitted me a sweater.

REFERENCES:
Haegeman, L. (1991) Introduction to Government and Binding Theory, Blackwell.
Haegeman, L. & J. Guron (1999) English Grammar: A Generative Perspective, Blackwell.
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, J. Svartvik (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the
English Language. Longman.
Radford, A. (1997) Syntactic Theory and the structure of English: A minimalist approach.
CUP.
Rothstein, S. (1995) Small Clauses and Copular Constructions, in A. Cardinatelli and M. T.
Guasti (eds.) Syntax and Semantics, Volume 28, Small Clauses, 27-48, Academic Press.

Page 8 of 8/ Lesson 8