Editing Lexical semantics (section)

==== Kayne's 1981 unambiguous path analysis ====
{{multiple image
| align = right
| direction = horizontal
| header =
| width = 110

| image1 = Unambiguouspathstree.png
|thumb
| caption1 = Tree diagram (8a)

| image2 = Unambiguouspathtree.png
|thumb
| caption2 = Tree diagram (8b)

}}
Richard Kayne proposed the idea of unambiguous paths as an alternative to c-commanding relationships, which is the type of structure seen in examples (8). The idea of unambiguous paths stated that an antecedent and an anaphor should be connected via an unambiguous path. This means that the line connecting an antecedent and an anaphor cannot be broken by another argument.<ref name="Kayne">Kayne, R. (1981). Unambiguous paths. In R. May & F. Koster (Eds.), Levels of syntactic representation (143-184). Cinnaminson, NJ: Foris Publications.</ref> When applied to ditransitive verbs, this hypothesis introduces the structure in diagram (8a). In this tree structure it can be seen that the same path can be traced from either DP to the verb. Tree diagram (7b) illustrates this structure with an example from English. This analysis was a step toward binary branching trees, which was a theoretical change that was furthered by Larson's VP-shell analysis.<ref name="Larson" />