scholarly journals ‘Give it him and then I’ll give you money for it’. The dative alternation in Contemporary British English

2018 ◽  
pp. 15-28
Author(s):  
Juan Lorente Sánchez
Keyword(s):  
Double Object ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Ditransitive Verbs ◽  
British National Corpus ◽  
Prepositional Object ◽  
Linguistic Phenomenon

‘Dative alternation’ refers to a linguistic phenomenon related to ditransitive verbs, that is, verbs which take a subject and two objects referring to a theme and a recipient. In English, the phenomenon offers the possibility of alternation between a prepositional object construction (PREP), where the recipient is encoded as a prepositional phrase (give it to him), a double object construction (DOC), where the recipient precedes the theme (give him it) and an alternative double object construction (altDOC), where the theme takes precedence over the recipient (give it him), the latter constrained to dialectal usage. Even though this alternation has been extensively addressed in the literature, few studies have considered language-external factors in determining the choice of encoding. This paper analyses the distribution of ditransitive forms in competition in contemporary British English from a twofold perspective, shedding some light on the distribution of these variants across time, along with the study of PREP, DOC and altDOC in relation to their sociolinguistic dimension. The corpus used as source of evidence is the British National Corpus, a 100-million-word collection of both written and spoken language from a wide range of sources.

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.

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.

I gave it him — on the motivation of the ‘alternative double object construction’ in varieties of British English

2007 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Volker Gast
Keyword(s):  
Clause Structure ◽  
Verb Second ◽  
Double Object ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Second Languages ◽  
Language Discourse ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Prepositional Object ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

Three ditransitive constructions can be found in varieties of British English: (i) the ‘prepositional object construction’, where the recipient is encoded as a prepositional phrase (gave it to him); (ii) the ‘canonical double object construction’, where the recipient precedes the theme (gave him it); and (iii) the ‘alternative double object construction’, where the theme precedes the recipient (gave it him). The last of these constructions is typically found in (north)western varieties of British English when both objects are pronominal, and most of the relevant varieties have a ‘canonical’ ordering (REC > TH) when the theme is non-pronominal. Consequently, there seems to be an ‘inconsistency’ in the clause structure of the varieties in question. Using comparative and historical evidence, this article addresses the question of how this inconsistency can be explained. The ‘paradigmatic mismatch’ under discussion is shown to be a remnant of Old English clause structure which can also be observed in other verb second languages such as Modern German. It is argued to result from a tendency for both verb positions (finite/left and non-finite/right) to attract direct objects. This tendency is regarded as an effect of performance preferences in natural language discourse.

A smuggling approach to the dative alternation

2020 ◽  
pp. 96-107
Author(s):  
Chris Collins
Keyword(s):  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Dative Alternation ◽  
Object Construction

This chapter proposes a smuggling approach to the dative alternation. On the basis of traditional c-command tests, it is argued that the prepositional dative example in (ii) is derived from the structure underlying the double object construction in (i). i. John gave Mary the car (Double Object Construction). ii. John gave the car to Mary (Prepositional Dative). A smuggling analysis is motivated for the derivation of (ii). Once the VP containing the theme is moved over the goal, the theme then moves to a higher A position c-commanding the goal. Lastly, it is shown how the distribution of particles provides support for the smuggling analysis.

Lexical preference and variation in the complementation of provide

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-84
Author(s):  
Hans Martin Lehmann
Keyword(s):  
American English ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Viable Option ◽  
Data Set ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Lexical Choice ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Grammatical Variation ◽  
Syntactic Annotation

Abstract This paper investigates grammatical variation in the complementation of the verb provide. It describes the distribution of the four possible patterns with two internal arguments and the interaction between pattern choice and lexical choice. The study finds and documents significant differences in the preferred complementation patterns for American and British English as well as for spoken and written news genres. It also establishes the double object construction as a viable option for American English. Methodologically, this study is based on robust automatic syntactic annotation and computerized retrieval from a data-set comprising 2.5 billion words. It is this large amount of data that permits the observation of strong preferences in terms of pattern choice at the interface between grammar and lexis.

scholarly journals What makes you move? A minimalist study of object displacement in English Double Object Construction

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 6-24
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Bartczak-Meszyńska
Keyword(s):  
Initial Position ◽  
Initial Part ◽  
Double Object ◽  
British English ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Object Construction

The aim of this paper is to analyse the displacement phenomena the direct and indirect objects in the English Double Object Construction (DOC) can undergo. The focus is on the movement out of the DOC to the sentence initial position. The analysis concerns not only globally acceptable Goal-Theme object sequence but also the Theme-Goal DOC, which grammaticality is restricted only to a few British English dialects. The processes affecting the objects in the Prepositional Construction are also mentioned. The initial part of the paper is devoted to the underlying syntactic representations of the DOC in English. Following, e.g. Citko (2011), Cuervo (2003), Pylkkännen (2002, 2008), a representation with the Low Applicative Phrase has been adopted. The exact case valuation mechanism for relevant objects (as proposed by Bondaruk and Bartczak-Meszyńska (2014)) has been established. The remaining part of this paper contains a detailed discussion of the derivation of particular object initial sentences with the DOC in the active and in the passive and the interplay between passivisation and topicalisation, as the triggers of the object fronting.

Give it me!: pronominal ditransitives in English dialects

2013 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 445-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
JOHANNA GERWIN
Keyword(s):  
Regional Distribution ◽  
Online Version ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
British National Corpus ◽  
English Dialect ◽  
Diachronic Development ◽  
National Corpus

Constructions involving a ditransitive verb, a direct theme object, and an indirect recipient object have been extensively studied – especially in the contexts of the ‘dative’ and the ‘benefactive alternations’, i.e. the alternations between a double-object construction (DOC) (e.g. She gave him a book) and a corresponding prepositional construction (PREP) either with to (e.g. She gave a book to him) or with for (e.g. She bought a book for him). The present study focuses on a ditransitive phenomenon which occurs in British dialects: when both objects are pronouns, three variants of encoding are possible: DOC (e.g. Give me it!), PREP (e.g. Give it to me!) and the alternative double-object construction (altDOC) (e.g. Give it me!). The regional distribution and diachronic development of the three constructions are traced using two corpora containing regional speech: the Freiburg English Dialect Corpus (FRED)1 and the online version of the British National Corpus (BNCweb). In concentrating on a dialect phenomenon, in taking language-external determinants of the ‘dative/benefactive alternation’ into consideration, and in investigating these empirically, the present study takes a novel approach to the much-discussed topic of ditransitives in English.

Syntax of Ditransitives

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heidi Harley ◽  
Shigeru Miyagawa
Keyword(s):  
Generative Grammar ◽  
Double Object ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Double Object Construction ◽  
Hierarchical Relationship ◽  
Class A ◽  
Object Construction ◽  
The Face ◽  
Ditransitive Verbs ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

Ditransitive predicates select for two internal arguments, and hence minimally entail the participation of three entities in the event described by the verb. Canonical ditransitive verbs include give, show, and teach; in each case, the verb requires an agent (a giver, shower, or teacher, respectively), a theme (the thing given, shown, or taught), and a goal (the recipient, viewer, or student). The property of requiring two internal arguments makes ditransitive verbs syntactically unique. Selection in generative grammar is often modeled as syntactic sisterhood, so ditransitive verbs immediately raise the question of whether a verb may have two sisters, requiring a ternary-branching structure, or whether one of the two internal arguments is not in a sisterhood relation with the verb. Another important property of English ditransitive constructions is the two syntactic structures associated with them. In the so-called “double object construction,” or DOC, the goal and theme both are simple NPs and appear following the verb in the order V-goal-theme. In the “dative construction,” the goal is a PP rather than an NP and follows the theme in the order V-theme-to goal. Many ditransitive verbs allow both structures (e.g., give John a book/give a book to John). Some verbs are restricted to appear only in one or the other (e.g. demonstrate a technique to the class/*demonstrate the class a technique; cost John $20/*cost $20 to John). For verbs which allow both structures, there can be slightly different interpretations available for each. Crosslinguistic results reveal that the underlying structural distinctions and their interpretive correlates are pervasive, even in the face of significant surface differences between languages. The detailed analysis of these questions has led to considerable progress in generative syntax. For example, the discovery of the hierarchical relationship between the first and second arguments of a ditransitive has been key in motivating the adoption of binary branching and the vP hypothesis. Many outstanding questions remain, however, and the syntactic encoding of ditransitivity continues to inform the development of grammatical theory.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document