scholarly journals Explaining Siewierska’s generalization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Hallman
Keyword(s):  
Prepositional Phrase ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Dative Case ◽  
Object Construction

AbstractThis article presents an explanation for a cross-linguistic gap observed by Anna Siewierska: morphologically unmarked indirect objects may alternate with prepositional marking in what is sometimes called a ‘dative’ or ‘prepositional-dative’ ditransitive frame, but never with actual dative case marking. ‘Dative’, to the extent it alternates with accusative, is always expressed as a preposition. I show firstly that German, which has a robust dative case paradigm, also displays a double object alternation in which the erstwhile dative DP occurs in a prepositional phrase, meaning both accusative (in English) and dative (in German) indirect objects alternate with prepositional encoding. I construct an analysis in which the the indirect object may be generated as either a DP (which receives dative in German and accusative in English) or a PP in the same theta position. This characterization of the double object alternation does not admit an alternation between dative and accusative case on the indirect object, capturing Siewierska’s generalization. The analysis also extends to ‘symmetric’ passive languages, in which either object in the double object construction can be raised to subject in the passive. Some current perspectives on this phenomenon make such languages exceptions to Siewierska’s generalization, but not the analysis proposed here.

The double object constructions in Archaic Chinese*

2008 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 43-84
Author(s):  
Chiew Pheng PHUA ◽  
PHUA Chiew Pheng
Keyword(s):  
Low Frequency ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
Semantic Role ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Archaic Chinese ◽  
Object Marking

This article demonstrates that double object constructions in Archaic Chinese display both patterns of direct and indirect object marking (DO+IO) and primary and secondary object marking (PO+SO). We propose two constraints to account for the grammatical distribution of GIVE verbs in the double object construction with PO+SO marking in Archaic Chinese. The first constraint is syntactic and explains why verbs like xiàn ? 'offer' cannot occur in the double object construction with PO+SO marking, unless the semantic role of recipient is available for mapping onto direct object in a monotransitive clause. A second constraint on animacy is proposed to explain the low frequency of two animate, particularly two human NPs, in the postverbal position for verbs like qī ? 'marry'.

On the Double Object Construction and the Oblique Construction in Cantonese

1997 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xu Liejiong ◽  
Alain Peyraube
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Theory ◽  
Controversial Issue ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
Reverse Order ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
To Come ◽  
Focus Information

The double-object construction has always been a controversial issue in linguistic theory. In Chinese we encounter an interesting and peculiar situation: both Mandarin and Cantonese have the dative construction with the indirect object (IO) introduced by a dative preposition (V + DO + Prep. + IO), but when the preposition is absent, the indirect object always precedes the direct object (DO)) in Mandarin (V + IO + DO), while the reverse order is predominant in Cantonese (V + DO + IO). What is the origin of the Cantonese form V + DO + IO? In many previous studies, V + DO + IO is said to come from V + IO + DO. In this paper we first show that neither synchronic nor diachronic evidence favors the Movement Hypothesis that V + DO + IO is derived from V + IO + DO. The former is not a free variant of the latter. We then argue, synchronically and diachronically, that V + DO + IO is derived from V + DO + Prep. + IO by Preposition Deletion. The two forms share the same constraints in relation to the semantic nature of the verbs and the focus information transmitted by the two objects (DO and IO).

scholarly journals The abscence of the linker in double object constructions in Nuu

2004 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 163-198 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Collins
Keyword(s):  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Dative Case ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Case Marker

The linker in Nluu appears before various types of nominal expressions, but not before the second object in a double object construction. Linkers in Khoisan languages such as +Hoan and Jul'hoansi do appear in this position. I will show that this property of the linker in Nluu is related to the fact that Nluu has a dative Case marker -a which appears after the first object of a DOC, whereas +Hoan and Jul'hoansi do not. 1.

Case and Licensing: Evidence from ECM+DOC

2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-319 ◽  
Author(s):  
Milan Rezac
Keyword(s):  
Exceptional Case ◽  
Single Object ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Theoretic Concept ◽  
Case Morphology ◽  
Exceptional Case Marking

This remark argues for the Case-theoretic concept of Case as a syntactic licensing requirement of DPs related to their case morphology, against alternatives where DPs need no syntactic licensing, or where their case morphology is unrelated to it. The argument is made from constraints on combining exceptional Case marking (ECM) and the double object construction, where there is a single object Agree/Case locus for two DPs. The mechanisms and nature of Case are briefly examined. The appendix sketches an extension to wager-class ECM.

scholarly journals The semantics of the aan-construction in 16th-century Dutch: A semasiological and onomasiological approach

Literator ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dario Rens
Keyword(s):  
Direct Object ◽  
16Th Century ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Ditransitive Verbs

This article focuses on the semantics of the Dutch aan-construction [NP V NP aan NP], for example, Jan geeft een boek aan Piet (‘Jan gives a book to Piet’) in the 16th-century. In modern Dutch the aan-construction is used as an alternative to the Dutch double object construction, but previous research suggests that the use of ditransitive verbs in the Dutch aan-construction is only a 16th-century innovation – this alternation is called the ‘dative alternation’. However, it is not clear which ditransitive verbs initiated the dative alternation. Colleman (2010) believes that the first instances of the ditransitive use of the aan-construction are concrete physical movements of the direct object from the subject to the indirect object; however, he argues there is no quantitative proof to support those claims. In a self-compiled corpus of 16th-century Dutch, this article tries to find the evidence which is needed to underpin Colleman’s hypothesis by making use of the distinctive collexeme analysis and its diachronic variant. The results show that the first ditransitive instances of the aan-construction are indeed concrete uses, but that there is also an increase in the metaphorical use of the construction.

scholarly journals Locating variation in the dative alternation

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Biggs
Keyword(s):  
Double Object ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Main Variety ◽  
Syntactic Properties

This paper investigates the structure of the dative alternation in dialects of Northwest British English. This includes theme passivization of apparent Double Object Constructions (It was given her). Detailed investigation shows that different dialects use distinct licensing strategies to derive the Theme passive structure. The main variety discussed is Liverpool English, where Theme passivisation is shown to derive from a prepositional dative with a null preposition. In contrast, Manchester English, a neighbouring variety, derives Theme passives of the Double Object Construction, via an Applicative configuration (Haddican 2010, Haddican and Holmberg 2012). The study shows that a range of syntactic properties and restrictions on a structure can be traced back to variation in the functional lexicon.

Exploring epicentres empirically

2016 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefan Th. Gries ◽  
Tobias Bernaisch
Keyword(s):  
South Asia ◽  
Random Effects ◽  
South Asian ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Indian English ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Deviation Analysis ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction

The present paper studies the dative alternation with GIVE, i.e. the alternation between the double-object construction (e.g. John gave Mary a book) and the prepositional dative (e.g. John gave a book to Mary), in relation to the norms underlying this constructional choice in six South Asian Englishes. Via Multifactorial Prediction and Deviation Analysis with Regression (MuPDAR) including random effects, we identify (i) factors triggering different constructional choices in South Asian Englishes in comparison to British English and (ii) the linguistic epicentre of English in South Asia with regard to the dative alternation. We are able to show that discourse accessibility of patient and recipient as well as pronominality of recipient are actuators of structural nativisation in South Asian Englishes and — in agreement with a more general sociolinguistic approach — find via a bottom-up approach that Indian English may be regarded as the linguistic epicentre of English for South Asia.

Ditransitives in Middle English: on semantic specialisation and the rise of the dative alternation

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (01) ◽  
pp. 149-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
EVA ZEHENTNER
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Analysis ◽  
Middle English ◽  
Causal Relation ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Verb Classes ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ditransitive Verbs

This article discusses the plausibility of a correlation or even a causal relation between two phenomena that can be observed in the history of English ditransitives. The changes concerned are: first, the emergence of the ‘dative alternation’, i.e. the establishment of a link between the double object construction (DOC) and its prepositional paraphrase, and second, a reduction in the range of verb classes associated with the DOC, with the construction's semantics becoming specialised to basic transfer senses. Empirically, the article is based on a quantitative analysis of the occurrences of the DOC as well as its prepositional competitors in thePenn–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, 2nd edition (PPCME2). On the basis of these results, it will be argued that the semantic narrowing and the increasing ability of ditransitive verbs to be paraphrased by ato-prepositional construction (to-POC) interacted in a bi-directional causal manner.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document