The Genitive-Accusative of the Personal Pronouns in Old Church Slavonic

In those Slavic languages that retain both a case system and clitic pronominal forms two case-related phenomena partially overlap: (1) Masculine animate nouns and gendered pronouns display differential object marking with sensitivity to the animacy hierarchy. Some subset of these forms with the highest score on the animacy hierarchy show the original genitive form instead of the expected accusative in contexts that otherwise call for that case, the so-called genitive-accusative. (2) Personal pronouns also show instances of the genitive for the accusative but with important differences. In languages with a clitic~stressed contrast for oblique pronominals the accusative forms generally are continued as clitics and the genitive forms as stressed. It is unlikely that the nominal and personal-pronominal gen.-acc. are unrelated. On the other hand, the case choice for nouns and gendered pronouns is sensitive to the animacy hierarchy, but for the personal pronouns the choice between genitive and accusative is phono-semantic. Whatever semantic structure evokes the stressed forms leads to the production of the gen.-acc. I suggest that gen.-acc. began with o-stem masculine personal names, the most prototypical expression of the semantic class [+human, +male, +free, +definite] and was extended to the interrogative pronoun (gen.-acc. kogo). The interrogative pronoun had just those properties that allowed the remapping of an animacy hierarchy into a tonicity distinction.

Download Full-text

The Differential Object Marking of The Arborense Dialect of Sardinian in Language Contact Setting

Journal of Language Contact ◽

10.1163/19552629-bja10002 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 13 (1) ◽

pp. 17-56

Author(s):

Daniela Boeddu

Keyword(s):

Language Contact ◽

Historical Data ◽

Noun Phrases ◽

Personal Pronouns ◽

Extensive Area ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Personal Names ◽

Object Marking ◽

High Degree ◽

Mandatory Use

This paper focuses on the Arborense Differential Object Marking (dom) system, which in line with the typical Sardinian dom system marks the object noun phrases characterized by a high degree of animacy and specificity with the preposition a. This is why the Sardinian dom is also called prepositional accusative. Authors dealing with other Sardinian dialects agree in identifying three domains of distribution of the phenomenon: with personal pronouns and personal names the use of the preposition is mandatory; with inanimate common nouns it is excluded; with common nouns referring animate beings, strong variability occurs. On the basis of an oral corpus of contemporary Arborense, it can be stated that the area of mandatory use of dom is restricted in this dialect and that the optionality area turns out to be more extensive than assumed in traditional descriptions of this Sardinian phenomenon. Since all the Arborense speakers of the oral corpus are bilingual (Sardinian-Italian), the data reflect the situation of dom in a contact setting scenario where Sardinian and both Standard and Regional Italian interact. According to Putzu (2005) and Blasco Ferrer and Ingrassia (2010), the extensive area of optionality for the use of the Sardinian dom should be the result of the influence of Standard Italian. However, two facts must be considered that make this idea questionable: first, in the language contact scenario of Modern Sardinian not only Standard Italian but also Regional Italian (with a widespread use of the dom) play a role; second, the synchronic variation observed in contemporary Arborense replicates the same variation which characterizes historical data from texts of the 12th–19th centuries.

Download Full-text

Case Marking in Istro-Romanian

Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Philologia ◽

10.24193/subbphilo.2020.4.11 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 65 (4) ◽

pp. 173-187

Author(s):

Ionuț Geană

Keyword(s):

The Other ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Indirect Object ◽

Case Marking ◽

Other Hand ◽

Case System ◽

Object Marking

Case Marking in Istro-Romanian. This paper focuses on the key elements of case marking in Istro-Romanian (IR). Similar to Daco Romanian, IR has a four-case system (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative), added by the vocative (not to be dealt with specifically in this paper). As a member of the so called Balkan Sprachbund, IR nouns oppose nominative-accusative to genitive dative. Pronouns, on the other hand, show a full paradigm, with specific forms for each case (in line with all other Eastern Romance varieties). For the oblique, IR has both stressed/strong and non-stressed/clitic forms, however they have a different distribution than in standard and sub standard Daco-Romanian. Differential object marking is virtually unheard of (with minor cases in northern IR). Indirect object doubling is rare(r), with possibly different pragmatic values than in Daco Romanian.

Download Full-text

Topicality and differential object marking

Studies in Language ◽

10.1075/sl.34.2.01iem ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 34 (2) ◽

pp. 239-272 ◽

Cited By ~ 32

Author(s):

Giorgio Iemmolo

Keyword(s):

Information Structure ◽

Comparative Data ◽

Romance Languages ◽

Semantic Features ◽

Personal Pronouns ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Theoretical Approaches ◽

Left Dislocation ◽

Object Marking ◽

The Relationship

The present paper investigates the relationship between dislocation and differential object marking in some Romance languages. As in many languages that have a DOM system, it is usually also assumed that in Romance languages the phenomenon is regulated by the semantic features of the referents, such as animacy, definiteness, and specificity. In the languages under investigation, though, these features cannot explain the distribution and the emergence of DOM. After discussing the main theoretical approaches to the phenomenon, I will analyse DOM in four Romance languages. I will argue that DOM emerges in pragmatically and semantically marked contexts, namely with personal pronouns in dislocations. I will then show that in these languages the use of the DOM system is mainly motivated by the need to signal the markedness of these direct objects as a consequence of being used in (mainly left) dislocation as topics (cf. English “As for him, we didn’t see him”). Finally, the examination of comparative data from Persian and Amazonian languages lends further support to the advocated approach in terms of information structure

Download Full-text

Differential object marking in Ibero-Romance languages: Explanatory models in domestic and Russian educational literature

Rhema ◽

10.31862/2500-2953-2019-2-61-76 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 61-76

Author(s):

N. Pakhmutova

Keyword(s):

Explanatory Models ◽

Explanatory Model ◽

The Other ◽

Direct Object ◽

Romance Languages ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Didactic Literature ◽

Educational Literature ◽

Direct Objects ◽

Object Marking

Differential object marking / dom is the term for the phenomenon of distinguishing two classes of direct objects, one bearing a special marker, while the other lacking it. In modern linguistics, the marker licensing is partially or fully attributed to the features of a direct object: Animacy/Inanimacy and referential status. Russian didactic literature generally contains a reduced explanatory model of Spanish dom, based on the grammar of the Royal Spanish Academy. For Catalan, the explanatory model is complicated by the usus/norm split, the latter reducing the phenomenon’s scope. The paper focuses on the improvement of dom explanatory models for Spanish and Catalan.

Download Full-text

Ergativity and Differential Case Marking

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739371.013.11 ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Andrej L. Malchukov

Keyword(s):

The Other ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Case Marking ◽

Other Hand ◽

General Constraints ◽

Different Types ◽

Object Marking ◽

The One

The present chapter discusses patterns of differential case marking in ergative languages, focusing on differential subject marking, which is more prominent in ergative languages (in contrast to accusative languages, where differential object marking is more prominent). It is argued that patterns of (differential) case marking can be accounted two general constraints related to (role)-indexing, on the one hand, and distinguishability (or markedness) on the other hand. This approach correctly predicts asymmetries between differential object marking (DOM) and differential subject marking (DSM) with regard to animacy, definiteness, as well as discourse features. I also show how this approach can be extended to capture a relation between case and voice alternation, as well as briefly outline diachronic scenarios leading to different types of differential case marking in ergative and split intransitive languages.

Download Full-text

Differential Object Marking in Spanish: state of the art

Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics ◽

10.7557/1.2.2.2603 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 1 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Antonio Fábregas

Keyword(s):

Current Literature ◽

State Of The Art ◽

The Other ◽

Direct Object ◽

Font Size ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Internal Properties ◽

Object Marking ◽

Syntactic Properties

This state of the art tries to cover as much as possible about the properties, conditions and analyses of Differential Object Marking (DOM) in Spanish. Starting with some considerations about the boundaries of the phenomenon, it considers its morphological, semantic and syntactic properties –with respect both to the internal properties of the direct object and to the wider context in which it appears–. It also reviews the other morphosyntactic phenomena that have been claimed to correlate with DOM, and finally goes through a number of analysis in different theoretical traditions to highlight the points of agreement and debate in the current literature.

Download Full-text

Asimetrías gramaticales asociadas a la animacidad en la lengua vasca: una perspectiva tipológica / Animacy-based grammatical asymmetries in Basque: a typological perspective

Anuario del Seminario de Filología Vasca Julio de Urquijo ◽

10.1387/asju.20209 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 52 (1/2) ◽

pp. 381 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Iván Igartua ◽

Ekaitz Santazilia

Keyword(s):

Language Contact ◽

Grammatical Gender ◽

The Other ◽

Case Assignment ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Case Marking ◽

Other Hand ◽

Object Marking ◽

The One

This study provides a typological analysis of two phenomena related to case-marking in Basque. In both of them, animacy —or the distinction between what is animate and what is not— turns out to be determinant: we discuss case assignment to direct objects, on the one hand, and marking of locative cases, on the other hand. We have compared the two phenomena with diverse typological parallels in order to account for the variety of possible morphological strategies and identify particular conditions and restrictions. Furthermore, we have argued that differential object marking in Basque is a recent phenomenon, induced by language contact, whereas differential locative marking has an intralinguistic nature. Finally, we have defended that the role of animacy in both types of differential marking is different: in the first example it conditions case assignment and in the second it operates as a grammatical gender.

Download Full-text

REFLEXÕES SOBRE A MARCAÇÃO MORFOLÓGICA DO OBJETO DIRETO POR A EM PORTUGUÊS BRASILEIRO | OBSERVATIONS ON THE MORPHOLOGICAL A-MARKING OF DIRECT OBJECTS IN BRAZILIAN PORTUGUESE

Estudos Linguísticos e Literários ◽

10.9771/ell.v0i58.26807 ◽

2017 ◽

pp. 83

Author(s):

Sônia Cyrino

Keyword(s):

Brazilian Portuguese ◽

The Other ◽

Direct Object ◽

Romance Languages ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Romance Language ◽

Other Hand ◽

Direct Objects ◽

Object Marking

Como é sabido, o espanhol é uma língua românica que requer que certos objetos diretos (OD) sejam morfologicamente marcados por a, a chamada Marcação Diferencial do Objeto (DOM). Em outras línguas românicas, tais como o português europeu e brasileiro, por outro lado, objetos diretos animados não são geralmente marcados. Contudo, vários estudos diacrônicos mostram que a marcação morfológica por a do objeto direto era possível nos séculos XVI a XVIII em português, e houve um declínio nesse uso a partir dessa época. Interessantemente, no português brasileiro a marcação do objeto direto por a é ainda possível (ou opcional) em alguns contextos restritos. Neste trabalho, observo o espanhol e o português brasileiro para mostrar que essas línguas são diferentes com relação à marcação por a do objeto direto, mas semelhantes com relação ao fato de que objetos diretos animados são computados externamente ao vP. O trabalho pretende contribuir para a discussão dos efeitos da animacidade do objeto direto na sintaxe.Abstract: As is well-known, Spanish is a Romance language which requires that certain direct objects (DO) be morphologically marked by the preposition “a” (to), the so-called Differential Object Marking (DOM). In other Romance languages, such as European and Brazilian Portuguese, on the other hand, animate direct objects are not generally marked. However, several diachronic studies show that the morphological a-marking of the direct object was possible from the 16th to 18th centuries in Portuguese, and there was a decline of that use from then on. Interestingly, in Brazilian Portuguese, DO a-marking is still possible (or optional) in some restricted contexts. In this paper, I look at Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese to show that these languages are different with respect to the occurrence of the a-marking of the DO, but similar in relation to the fact that animate direct objects are moved to a position above the vP. This paper aims to contribute to the discussion on the effects ofanimacy of direct objects in syntax.

Download Full-text

Tipos de MDO en los verbos psicológicos del español

Borealis – An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics ◽

10.7557/1.4.1.3154 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 79

Author(s):

Bárbara Marqueta Gracia

Keyword(s):

Empirical Evidence ◽

Argument Structure ◽

The Other ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Other Hand ◽

Person Features ◽

Semantic Value ◽

Object Marking ◽

The One

RESUMEN. En el presente artículo se pretende argumentar la necesidad de establecer una distinción entre diferentes instancias de Marcado Diferencial de Objeto (MDO) en los verbos psicológicos de sujeto experimentante en español. En algunos casos, la aparición de a es obligatoria independientemente de la estructura argumental del verbo implicado, y está vinculada a la presencia en la configuración de rasgos deícticos de persona. Dichos rasgos son inducidos tanto por la presencia de clíticos de dativo como de objetos que mantienen relaciones locativas y/o partitivas.En otros casos, la distribución del MDO es opcional y sensible a la estructura argumental del verbo, alternando con la rección directa -sin preposición-. Esta distribución supone la proyección de un rasgo conceptual de causa, identificado en la posición de objeto/causa de la experiencia psicológica por parte de la preposición a.ABSTRACT. In this paper, we present empirical evidence showing that a different kind of Differential Object Marking (DOM) in Spanish “Psych” experiencer verbs can be distinguished. On the one hand, we found obligatory contexts of marking (regardless of the argument structure of the verb and the animacy/specifity of the object). These are connected with the presence of deictic person features, triggered by dative clitics or objects which bear a locative/partitive relationship. On the other hand, we can found optional marking, determined by the experiencer-subject/causer-object´s structure, which will be related to a default semantic value of causer in the object projection identified by the preposition.

Download Full-text

Differential object marking and Scales: insights from diachrony

Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America ◽

10.3765/plsa.v4i1.4561 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 57

Author(s):

Monica Alexandrina Irimia ◽

Anna Pineda

Keyword(s):

The Other ◽

Differential Object Marking ◽

Old Spanish ◽

Other Hand ◽

Object Marking ◽

The One

This paper addresses a generally ignored counterexample to the Scales, comparing Old Catalan and Old Romanian on the one hand to Old Spanish on the other hand. Contrary to widely assumed marking hierarchies, Old Catalan/Old Romanian 3rd person pronouns show differential object marking, to the exclusion of or to a higher degree than 1st/2nd persons. We propose these patterns can be straightforwardly derived once we pin down micro-parameters in the composition of Romance DPs and the consequences various types of perspectival/sentience features have on the syntactic licensing of arguments.

Download Full-text