Canonical linking rules for mapping thematic roles with syntactic functions were studied. Three experiments were undertaken to investigate the nature of productive forward linking (from semantics to syntax) and productive reverse linking (from syntax to semantics). I proposed that reverse linking, in contrast to forward linking, requires more detailed specification of the syntactic structure; that is, a syntactic representation which specifies each particular syntactic frame and all the argument positions within that frame. Six specifically language-impaired children (aged 6;1 to 9;6) were matched on language abilities to 17 younger, normally developing children (language age 3;1 to 6;6). In Experiment 1--forward linking--the children were shown the meaning of a novel verb and had to describe the event using the novel verb. Experiment 2--a comprehension task--required acting out sentences containing the newly learned verbs. In Experiment 3--reverse linking--the children were told a sentence with a novel verb and had to act out its meaning, assigning thematic roles on the basis of the syntactic frame. Group and individual analysis generally revealed no significant differences between the specifically language-impaired children and the language age control children in Experiments 1 and 2, but a significant difference was found for Experiment 3. The normally developing children showed a good use of productive forward and reverse linking. The specifically language-impaired children demonstrated good productive forward linking but were significantly worse at reverse linking. An interpretation of the data, showing differences in the syntactic representation required for forward versus reverse linking, can account for the findings. I propose that a deficit in the area of "government" or "locality" which underlies c-selection and specifies the syntactic relationship between constituents can account for the data from this study and the data from previous investigations of specifically language-impaired children.