X-bar theory

The result can be very "tall" trees, such as those associated with X-bar theory.

This parse tree is simplified; for more information, see X-bar theory.

The notion of maximal projection is adopted from X-bar theory.

There are three "syntax assembly" rules which form the basis of X-bar theory.

X-bar theory, for instance, often sees individual words corresponding to phrasal categories.

However, many modern schools of syntax - especially those that have been influenced by X-bar theory - make no such restriction.

In the mid 1990s, there were two major attempts to deduce versions of X-bar theory from independent principles.

Theories of syntax that employ X-bar theory, in contrast, will acknowledge many individual words as phrases.

X-bar theory derives its name from the overbar.

The theory derives a version of X-bar theory.

In X-bar theory in linguistics, specifiers, head words, and complements together form phrases.

X-bar theory contends that every noun has a corresponding determiner (or specifier).

X-bar theory makes use of overbar notation to indicate differing levels of syntactic structure.

For more complex utterances, different theories of grammar assign X-bar theory elements to phrase types in different ways.

Linguists interested in X-bar theory causally link zero articles to nouns lacking a determiner.

Phrase-structure trees, first using the original X-bar theory, then using the modern DP approach:

X-bar theory (formal linguistics)

A simple sentence is often decomposed into two phases, CP and vP (see X-bar theory).

Originally, X-bar theory used a bar over syntactic units to indicate bar-levels in syntactic structure, generally rendered as an overbar.

Richard Kayne's theory of Antisymmetry derived X-bar theory from the assumption that there was a tight relation between structure and linear order.

Minimalist approaches to phrase structure have resulted in "Bare Phrase Structure," an attempt to eliminate X-bar theory.

X-bar theory is a component of linguistic theory which attempts to identify syntactic features presumably common to all those human languages that fit in a presupposed (1965) framework.

There are several important respects in which mirror theory is different from more traditional theories of phrase structure in generative linguistics such as X-bar theory or bare phrase structure.

The example tree in the first section of this article is in accordance with X-bar theory (with the exception that [Spec,CP] is treated as an adjunct).

In a case where a noun does not have an explicit determiner (as in physics uses mathematics), X-bar theory hypothesizes the presence of a zero article, or zero determiner.