l role element of the statement. The unifying element is that of Theme, and, significantly, the Theme must be localized; i.e., there must be small room for ambiguity.
The antecedent of the reflexive anaphor in the simplest kinds of statements will also be a syntactic subject in many (though not all) cases. More precisely, as will be seen hereafter, it will be the Agent of action or being that assigns a role to the reflexive anaphor. Similarly, the anaphor must assume the role in the same specific way that it is assigned.
Wilkins assigns special significance to what she terms the r structure, or role assignment, and she shows that the role is inextricably bound up with theme, which emerges as a function of it. In her view, the role that nominal or pronominal Agents assume is decisive in determining when a reflexive construction is appropriate and results in a true statement. It is the role, too, which determines the integrity of thematic structure, or "the aspect of semantic interpretation that is relevant to the distribution of reflexives" (Wilkins 192). This view departs slightly from that of Jackendoff, who says that thematic relations such as Theme, Agent, and Goal are more properly represented as structural positions in a level of semantic/conceptual structure, not as a list of roles annotated in the syntax (Jackendoff). In other words, there is a hierarchy of diction which must be adhered to for appropriate expression. Where Jackendoff and Wilkins appear to agree is in the fact that role and theme are related.
A connection between role and theme can be found in the use of reflexive pronouns. In the simplest kind of statement containing a reflexive pronoun, the principal agent of action or being assigns a thematic role to the reflexive anaphor, which is the same as the agent/antecedent. The statement Mary saw herself or Mary saw herself in the mirror would fall into this category. In this construction, the Mary is the ag...