Indirect objects in Siswati

1987 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 309-326
Author(s):  
Videa P. De Guzman
Keyword(s):  
Object Relations ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Bantu Languages ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Object Properties ◽  
Relational Grammar ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

Contrary to the view that in Bantu languages the two unmarked nominals following the verb in ditransitive constructions need not be distinguished because both possess the same object properties, this paper shows the necessity of making a distinction between the direct object and the indirect object relations. Evidence comes from SiSwati, the language of Swaziland, and the analysis of the data is cast in the Relational Grammar framework. The arguments presented refer to word order, object concord (or pronominal copy) and the interaction between object concord and some syntactic phenomena such as passivization, topicalization, relativization, and clefting. By distinguishing the direct object from the indirect object in Siswati, the grammar is able to provide a more natural account for a number of related double object constructions.

scholarly journals Grammatical relations in Ikalanga

2006 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-208
Author(s):  
Joyce T. Mathangwane ◽  
E. Kweku Osam
Keyword(s):  
Direct Object ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Bantu Languages ◽  
Intermediate Language ◽  
The Core ◽  
Grammatical Relations ◽  
Applicative Constructions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

Although facts about grammatical relations in many Bantu languages have been established since the early 1970s, there are still languages in this family which have not benefited from such studies. One of these is Ikalanga, spoken in Botswana and Zimbabwe. This paper examines the core grammatical relations of Ikalanga, exploring its typological status in terms of double object constructions. In prototypical ditransitive constructions, the Recipient NP has all of the properties of Direct Object, whereas the Theme NP has only some of those features. The conclusion is that Ikalanga is an intermediate language if object symmetricity is scalar. However, it is shown that in marked applicative constructions where the Benefactive is non-human and the Theme is human, there is reason to argue for 'split direct-objecthood', reflecting the impact of animacy in the assignment of direct objecthood.

scholarly journals Bhadarwahi: A Typological Sketch

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-148
Author(s):  
Amitabh Vikram DWIVEDI
Keyword(s):  
Noun Phrase ◽  
Distinctive Feature ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Noun Phrases ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
Prominent Feature ◽  
Jammu And Kashmir ◽  
Dominant Language ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Main Verb

This paper is a summary of some phonological and morphosyntactice features of the Bhadarwahi language of Indo-Aryan family. Bhadarwahi is a lesser known and less documented language spoken in district of Doda of Jammu region of Jammu and Kashmir State in India. Typologically it is a subject dominant language with an SOV word order (SV if without object) and its verb agrees with a noun phrase which is not followed by an overt post-position. These noun phrases can move freely in the sentence without changing the meaning of the sentence. The indirect object generally precedes the direct object. Aspiration, like any other Indo-Aryan languages, is a prominent feature of Bhadarwahi. Nasalization is a distinctive feature, and vowel and consonant contrasts are commonly observed. Infinitive and participle forms are formed by suffixation while infixation is also found in causative formation. Tense is carried by auxiliary and aspect and mood is marked by the main verb.

scholarly journals Binding German (In)direct Objects: Spell-Out Strategies for Disambiguation

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Nicholas Twiner ◽  
Vera Lee-Schoenfeld
Keyword(s):  
Direct Object ◽  
Distributed Morphology ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Binding Data ◽  
Acceptability Rating ◽  
Canonical Surface ◽  
Direct Objects ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Idiomatic Meaning

Despite Grewendorf’s (1988) well-known German binding data with the double-object verb zeigen ‘show’, which suggests that the direct object (DO) is generated higher than the indirect object (IO), this paper argues for the canonical surface order of IO>DO as base order. Highlighting the exceptional status of Grewendorf's examples, building on Featherston & Sternefeld’s (2003) quantitative acceptability rating study, and exploiting the fact that zeigen can also be used as inherently reflexive with idiomatic meaning, and we appeal to Bruening's (2010) theory of idiom formation as well as the Encyclopedia within Distributed Morphology (Marantz 1997, Embick & Noyer 2007) and propose a flexible Spell-Out mechanism within a derivational approach to binding (e.g. Hornstein 2001 and Zwart 2002) that can override narrow syntactic case licensing by realizing nominals with different morphological case.

Rules and construction effects in learning the argument structure of verbs

2003 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 797-821 ◽  
Author(s):  
KATHERINE DEMUTH ◽  
'MALILLO MACHOBANE ◽  
FRANCINA MOLOI
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Rule Learning ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Learning Problem ◽  
Order Restrictions ◽  
Bantu Languages ◽  
Verb Semantics ◽  
Applicative Constructions

Theorists of language acquisition have long debated the means by which children learn the argument structure of verbs (e.g. Bowerman, 1974, 1990; Pinker, 1984, 1989; Tomasello, 1992). Central to this controversy has been the possible role of verb semantics, especially in learning which verbs undergo dative-shift alternation in languages like English. The learning problem is somewhat simplified in Bantu double object constructions, where all applicative verbs show the same order of postverbal objects. However, Bantu languages differ as to what that order is, some placing the benefactive argument first, and others placing the animate argument first. Learning the language-specific word-order restrictions on Bantu double object applicative constructions is therefore more akin to setting a parameter (cf. Hyams, 1986). This study examined 100 three- to eight-year-old children's knowledge of word order restrictions in Sesotho double object applicatives. Performance on forced choice elicited production tasks found that four-year-olds showed evidence of rule learning, although eight-year-olds had not yet attained adult levels of performance. Further investigation found lexical construction effects for three-year-olds. These findings suggest that learning the argument structure of verbs, even when lexical semantics is not involved, may be more sensitive to lexical construction effects than previously thought.

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 Double object constructions and dative / accusative alternations in Spanish and Catalan: A unified account

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Pineda
Keyword(s):  
Font Size ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Clitic Doubling ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Transitivity Alternations ◽  
Object Marking ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

<span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;" lang="EN-US">This paper has a twofold aim: to present a unified analysis of ditransitive constructions and transitivity alternations (dative/accusative alternations) in Spanish. As for the first phenomenon, and more concretely the purported existence in Spanish of something comparable to the English dative alternation, we will show the weaknesses of what we consider an analysis fruit of the tendency consisting of finding in the Romance area an exact reflex of English facts. Therefore, we will refute the hypothesis defended by several authors (Masullo 1992, Demonte 1995, Romero 1997, Cuervo 2003a,b) according to which Spanish ditransitive constructions with dative clitic doubling correspond to double object constructions (DOC), whereas non-doubled constructions correspond to the so-called prepositional constructions (PC), or <em>to-</em>dative, in English. After a careful and exhaustive examination of the data, we will argue that Spanish (and Catalan) ditransitive constructions instantiate DOC, whether they bear clitic doubling or not. &nbsp;Pronominalization facts in Catalan, a language which preserves prepositional clitics, will support this analysis, based on the postulation of an affectedness/possession restriction with gradual implementation. As for the second phenomenon of study, the existence of true case alternations in Spanish, we will argue that we are dealing with a kind of variation constrained by the same restriction (or a version of it) which acts in the realm of ditransitive predicates. Here, also, Catalan data will reveal crucial for our analysis. Crucially, we will show that what lies behind Spanish and Catalan dative/accusative alternation is an instance of Differential Indirect Object Marking (DIOM</span>

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 Which comes first in the double object construction?

2015 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 247-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
NURIA YÁÑEZ-BOUZA ◽  
DAVID DENISON
Keyword(s):  
Direct Object ◽  
List Type ◽  
Type Number ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Dialectal Variation ◽  
Indirect Object ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
History Of ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Late Modern

Competition between two methods of marking recipient/beneficiary and theme has figured in much recent research:(1)Jim gave the driver £5.   (indirect object before direct object)(2)Jim gave £5 to the driver.   (direct object before prepositional phrase)A reverse double object variant is often ignored or treated as a minor and highly restricted variant:(3)(a)?Jim gave £5 the driver.   (direct object before indirect object)(b)Jim gave it him.However, pattern (3) was much more widespread even in late Modern English, while there is clear dialectal variation within present-day British English.In this article we investigate the pronominal pattern (3b), mainly in relation to pattern (1), tracking its progressive restriction in distribution. We mine three of the Penn parsed corpora for the general history in English of double object patterns with two pronoun objects. We then add a further nine dialect and/or historical English corpora selected for coverage and representativeness. A usage database of examples in these corpora allows more detailed description than has been possible hitherto. The analysis focuses on verb lemmas, objects and dialect variation and offers an important corrective to the bulk of research on the so-called Dative Alternation between patterns (1) and (2). We also examine works in the normative grammatical tradition, producing a precept database that reveals the changing status of variants as dialectal or preferred. In our conclusion we show the importance of prefabricated expressions (prefabs) in the later history of (3), sketching an analysis in Construction Grammar terms.

scholarly journals Accessibility and word order: The case of ditransitive constructions in Persian

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pegah Faghiri ◽  
Pollet Samvelian ◽  
Barbara Hemforth
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Evidence ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Length ◽  
Direct Object ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Differential Object Marking ◽  
Object Marking ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

In a most recent corpus study on Persian, Faghiri & Samvelian (2014) found a significant effect of relative length in the ordering preferences between the direct and indirect objects in the preverbal domain corresponding to "long-before-short". They furthermore showed that the position of the direct object mainly depends on its degree of determination, and put into question the broadly accepted dual view based solely on differential object marking. In this paper, we provide experimental evidence in support of these corpus findings and further propose a unified account of ordering preferences between the two objects on the basis of conceptual accessibility.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document