Firbas (1979): "Semantically speaking, an object expresses an absolutely essential amplification of the semantic content of a transitive verb."

Hawkins (1990) mintzo zen gain paper inportantea zein dúten jokatzen buru sintaktikoak afin ezarri marko egokia non euren osagarriak sintaktikoki ondo kokatuko diren (ikus "Hawkins (1990): '... the attachment of NP to its dominating node cannot be made with confidence until the relevant (rightmost) head category is encountered.'"):

... the attachment of NP to its dominating node cannot be made with confidence until the relevant (rightmost) head category is encountered. [Hawkins, 1990]

Bai, ordenazio (kategoria sintaktiko) batzuk ...

... can act as unambiguous signals on-line ... [Hawkins, 1990]

bitárten besteak ...

... do not permit reliable inferences ... [Hawkins, 1990]

Horrá oinarrizko diferentzia.

Atzo, gainera, azpimarratu nahi genuen ze abantailak ti ordena progresiboa (sintaktikoki burulehena) ez dira amaitzen an esparru sintaktiko hutsa (zeintan kontua litzaké ziurtasunez aritzea barrén estruktura sintaktikoak), baizik-ze abantaila horiek zabaltzen dira ki esparru interpretatiboa, informatiboa, expresiboa, diskursiboa...

Adibidez, atzo aipatzen genuen Firbas, nok zún esan honako hau gain aspektu semantikoa e ordenazioa arten aditza eta bere objetua:

Semantically speaking, an object expresses an absolutely essential amplification of the semantic content of a transitive verb. If this amplification is constituted by a context independent notion, the necessity of amplification points in the direction of the further development of communication and makes the verb serve as an introductory element. To sum up, a. context independent goal of action is communicatively more important than the action itself. A context independent object expreesing a goal of action carries a higher degree of CD than the verb (cf. Firbas 1959). [Firbas, 1979]

Ondorioz, orohar, objetua abantailatsuki interpretatuko da (semantikoki ere) noiz aurkeztua ga bere aditza. [⇶]