Case and referential properties

In this paper we discuss a number of languages with a multidimensional Differential Object Marking (DOM) system. In such languages overt object marking is determined by more than one argument feature such as animacy or definiteness. We will show that such argument features can be related to case marking in different ways. On the one hand, they can trigger the occurrence of overt marking, on the other they can be the result of it. We will demonstrate that different languages may prioritize the different argument features in different ways. These cross-linguistic patterns call for a more flexible approach to DOM than hitherto developed. We develop a sign-based declarative model that does not rely on hierarchies but instead accounts for language-specific patterns and cross-linguistic variation on the basis of feature structures.

[1]  Geoffrey K. Pullum,et al.  The mathematics of language , 2006 .

[2]  M. Haspelmath,et al.  Descriptive scales versus comparative scales , 2008 .

[3]  Georg Bossong.  Empirische Universalienforschung : differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen , 1985 .

[4]  Kristin Davidse,et al.  The nominative & accusative and their counterparts , 2002 .

[5]  Michael C. Shapiro,et al.  Outline of Hindi Grammar , 1974 .

[6]  Esther Torrego,et al.  The Dependencies of Objects , 1998 .

[7]  Klaus Von Heusinger,et al.  Triggering and blocking effects in the diachronic development of DOM in Romanian , 2008 .

[8]  Marcus Kracht,et al.  The mathematics of language , 2003 .

[9]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Learning Constraint Subhierarchies: The Bidirectional Gradual Learning Algorithm , 2004 .

[10]  Manuel Leonetti,et al.  Specificity and Differential Object Marking in Spanish , 2004 .

[11]  Laura Brugè,et al.  On the accusative a in Spanish , 1996 .

[12]  Tonia Bleam,et al.  The role of semantic type in differential object marking , 2005 .

[13]  Patience Epps,et al.  A Grammar of Hup , 2008 .

[14]  Gabi Danon,et al.  Syntactic definiteness in the grammar of Modern Hebrew , 2001 .

[15]  Mengistu Amberber,et al.  Competition and Variation in Natural Languages , 2005 .

[16]  Andrej Malchukov,et al.  On fluid differential case marking: A bidirectional OT approach , 2007 .

[17]  Judith Aissen,et al.  Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs. Economy , 2003 .

[18]  N. Delbecque.  4. A construction grammar approach to transitivity in Spanish , 2002 .

[19]  Manuel Leonetti,et al.  Specificity and Object Marking: the Case of Spanish a , 2002 .

[20]  Gabi Danon,et al.  Caseless nominals and the projection of DP , 2006 .

[21]  Emar Maier,et al.  Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 9 , 2005 .

[22]  M. Haspelmath,et al.  Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies , 2010 .

[23]  Tara Warrier Mohanan,et al.  Arguments in Hindi , 1990 .

[24]  Helen Dehoop,et al.  Case Configuration and Noun Phrase Interpretation , 1996 .

[25]  J. Hawkins.  Efficiency and complexity in grammars , 2004 .

[26]  S. Thompson,et al.  Transitivity in Grammar and Discourse , 1980 .

[27]  Miriam Butt,et al.  Theoretical perspectives on word order in South Asian languages , 1994 .

[28]  M. Haspelmath,et al.  Optimality and diachronic adaptation , 1999 .

[29]  H. de Hoop,et al.  Case configuration and noun phrase interpretation , 1996 .

[30]  Carmen Dobrovie-Sorin.  The syntax of Romanian : comparative studies in Romance , 1994 .

[31]  Helen de Hoop,et al.  Ergative case-marking in Hindi , 2009 .

[32]  Mürvet Enç.  The semantics of specificity , 1991 .

[33]  M. Meyerhoff,et al.  Working papers in linguistics , 1994 .

[34]  Malcolm J. Bowman,et al.  Proceedings of the Workshop , 1978 .

[35]  Andrej L. Malchukov,et al.  Animacy and asymmetries in differential case marking , 2008 .

[36]  Elena Filimonova,et al.  The noun phrase hierarchy and relational marking: Problems and counterevidence , 2005 .

[37]  Peter de Swart,et al.  Cross-linguistic Variation in Object Marking , 2007 .

[38]  H. de Hoop,et al.  Semantic aspects of differential object marking , 2007 .

[39]  Jaklin Kornfilt,et al.  The case of the direct object in Turkish: Semantics, syntax and morphology , 2005 .

[40]  Patience Epps.  Hup's typological treasures: Description and explanation in the study of an Amazonian language , 2008 .

[41]  Balthasar Bickel,et al.  Referential scales and case alignment: reviewing the typological evidence , 2008 .

[42]  Jeffrey Lidz,et al.  The Grammar of Accusative Case in Kannada , 2006 .

[43]  K. Heusinger.  Proceedings of the Workshop "Specificity and the Evolution / Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance" , 2005 .

[44]  Helen de Hoop,et al.  Differential case-marking in Hindi , 2005 .

[45]  Beatrice Primus.  Animacy, Generalized Semantic Roles, and Differential Object Marking , 2012 .

[46]  Klaus von Heusinger,et al.  Verbal semantics and the diachronic development of DOM in Spanish , 2008 .

[47]  P. Kiparsky.  Universals Constrain Change; Change Results in Typological Generalizations , 2008 .