In the paper, we analyze three differently suffixed versions of the Hungarian nominal mental-state-as-cause construction ([Nmental-state.Case]cause), reflecting on their similarities and differences. Our analysis is corpus-driven and qualitative in nature: we investigate the semantics and syntax of the sister constructions, with special attention to how the presence or absence of the (definite) article influences DP projection and referential relations in the sentence. We argue that any relevant claim about the constructions can only be made based on a comparative analysis of their semantical and syntactical structures. We propose that the causal relationship is represented with different meaning elements in the three constructions. That is why although all three contain a “subject” with given thematic roles which, due to the causal relationship, needs to find its antecedent within the clause, the different meaning elements impose different restrictions on the “subjects” of the constructions and on the verb of the sentence that contains them. If the construction also features a possessive personal suffix, then not only semantic but also morpho-syntactic restrictions apply to the antecedent.