Ditransitive constructions in Caucasian Urum–The effect of givenness on the linearization of objects

2021 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 101290
Author(s):  
Stefanie Schröter
Keyword(s):  
Ditransitive Constructions

2. On Emai ditransitive constructions

2010 ◽  
pp. 115-144
Author(s):  
Ronald P. Schaefer ◽  
Francis O. Egbokhare
Keyword(s):  
Ditransitive Constructions

3. Ditransitive constructions in Yorùbá

2010 ◽  
pp. 145-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Atoyebi ◽  
Martin Haspelmath ◽  
Andrej Malchukov
Keyword(s):  
Ditransitive Constructions

scholarly journals Role-reference associations and the explanation of argument coding splits

Linguistics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-174
Author(s):  
Martin Haspelmath
Keyword(s):  
Language Use ◽  
General Pattern ◽  
General Level ◽  
Full Generality ◽  
Coding Efficiency ◽  
Object Marking ◽  
Case Markers ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

Abstract Argument coding splits such as differential (= split) object marking and split ergative marking have long been known to be universal tendencies, but the generalizations have not been formulated in their full generality before. In particular, ditransitive constructions have rarely been taken into account, and scenario splits have often been treated separately. Here I argue that all these patterns can be understood in terms of the usual association of role rank (highly ranked A and R, low-ranked P and T) and referential prominence (locuphoric person, animacy, definiteness, etc.). At the most general level, the role-reference association universal says that deviations from usual associations of role rank and referential prominence tend to be coded by longer grammatical forms. In other words, A and R tend to be referentially prominent in language use, while P and T are less prominent, and when less usual associations need to be expressed, languages often require special coding by means of additional flags (case-markers and adpositions) or additional verbal voice coding (e.g., inverse or passive markers). I argue that role-reference associations are an instance of the even more general pattern of form-frequency correspondences, and that the resulting coding asymmetries can all be explained by frequency-based predictability and coding efficiency.

The processing of case in near-native Spanish

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 281-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jill Jegerski
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
First Language ◽  
Differential Object Marking ◽  
L2 Processing ◽  
Case Marker ◽  
Object Marking ◽  
Case Markers ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

This article reports a study that sought to determine whether non-native sentence comprehension can show sensitivity to two different types of Spanish case marking. Sensitivity to case violations was generally more robust with indirect objects in ditransitive constructions than with differential object marking of animate direct objects, even among native speakers of Spanish, which probably reflects linguistic differences in the two types of case. In addition, the overall outcome of two experiments shows that second language (L2) processing can integrate case information, but that, unlike with native processing, attention to a case marker may depend on the presence of a preverbal clitic as an additional cue to the types of postverbal arguments that might occur in a stimulus. Specifically, L2 readers showed no sensitivity to differential object marking with a in the absence of clitics in the first experiment, with stimuli such as Verónica visita al/el presidente todos los meses ‘Veronica visits the[ACC/NOM]president every month’, but the L2 readers in the second experiment showed native-like sensitivity to the same marker when the object it marked was doubled by the clitic lo, as in Verónica lo visita al/el presidente todos los meses. With indirect objects, on the other hand, sensitivity to case markers was native-like in both experiments, although indirect objects were also always doubled by the preverbal clitic le. The apparent first language / second language contrast suggests differences in processing strategy, whereby non-native processing of morphosyntax may rely more on the predictability of forms than does native processing.

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.

Accounting for ditransitive constructions with envy and forgive

2008 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 187-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Colleman ◽  
Bernard De Clerck
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Multidimensional Approach ◽  
Structure Pattern ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Ditransitive Constructions

This paper presents an in-depth analysis of the English verbs envy and forgive in the ditransitive argument structure pattern [Sbj V Obj Obj]. Since the ditransitive construction is often associated with a basic ‘transfer of possession’ meaning in existing analyses of its constructional semantics, the occurrence of verbs like envy and forgive in this pattern is quite exceptional and has often been treated as an idiosyncratic use (see e.g. Green 1974, Goldberg 1995, Croft 2003). This paper adds to the etymological explanations traditionally offered to account for such cases (see Goldberg 1995) by presenting a complementary and semantically-driven account. It will be shown that although ditransitives with envy and forgive are obviously peripheral members of the class of ditransitive expressions, these uses are not semantically unmotivated. In this paper we will establish synchronic semantic links between the concepts of envying and forgiving and the central ‘possessional transfer’ meaning of the ditransitive and further elucidate them on the basis of a multidimensional approach to the semantics of grammatical constructions (Geeraerts 1998, Colleman 2006). On a higher plane, this semantic explanation underscores the feasibility of Goldberg’s polysemy approach to ditransitive semantics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document