accusative + analytical DO markers

Mon May 27 19:05:21 UTC 2013

Some of the facts of double-marking are reminiscent (on one particular perspective of the phenomena) of clitic-doubling and the relationship between clitics and affixes.

I discuss one approach to the issue in Why there are no clitics: http://ling.auf.net/lingbuzz/001680

Dan

On May 27, 2013, at 2:48 PM, Eitan Grossman wrote:

In Pieter Muysken's (2008) Functional Categories, he shows an interesting situation in Quechua: borrowed appositions (< Spanish) co-occur with inherited case-markers, e.g., hasta X-kama 'until X-until.' I think Dikker point out similar things for Media Lengua, like Sp. en + inherited locative marker -pi. So, basically double-marking.

Based on this, one might think that a possible situation that Sergey is looking for might involve a native flag together with a borrowed one. Again, looking at Quechuan, this time Ulcumayo (as described by Sanchez in Lingua 2011 [I think]), there's an example with Sp. origin a together with inherited accusative -ta:

Algo gati-pu-n a un niñuta.
Dog follow-DIR-3SG to a boy-ACC
‘The dog follows a boy’

And in Lamas Kechwa, there are more examples, although the details differ.

While I don't know of any such example that's become an established borrowing in the speech of monolinguals, this does perhaps show how such double flag strategies can get into a language.

On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Sergey Lyosov <sergelyosov at inbox.ru<mailto:sergelyosov at inbox.ru>> wrote:

Dear Anvita,
Thinking about your example:

u        Tong-bi     ara=pho
3sg     tree-acc    obj=cut
'He cut the tree' (fell to the ground)

Is ara= a true Dir. Obj. Marker in the strictest sence of the word? Is it not a trivial resumptive pronoun, in the way of the Latin American Spanish "lo golpeó a usted"?

          Sergey

Воскресенье, 26 мая 2013, 22:49 +05:30 от Anvita Abbi <anvitaabbi at gmail.com<mailto:anvitaabbi at gmail.com>>:
Present Great Andamanese has overt case marking such as accusative as well as object marking in the form of proclitics attached to the verbs. In fact there are several types of object clitics, depending upon the nature of the object. Thus,

u        Tong-bi     ara=pho
3sg     tree-acc    obj=cut
'He cut the tree' (fell to the ground)

u      com-bi      ut=pho
3sg   betel-acc  obj=cut
'He cut the betel nut (from its branch)' (separated from the source)

u     com-bi      ara=pho
3sg. betel-acc  obj= cut
'He cut the betel nut.' (cut it into pieces)

pHeÿi-bi             ik=tEr= lo-k-e
box-acc           obj= cl2=send-fa-imp
‘Send the box.’
Anvita

On Sun, May 26, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Sergey Lyosov <sergelyosov at inbox.ru<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3asergelyosov@inbox.ru>> wrote:
No-no, I believe the function of ET/OT in Hebrew (especially in Biblical Hebrew) is not the double marking I am looking for (analytical DOM + ACC case ending), et/ot is a host for bound accusative pronouns and thus an alternative to accusative pronouns hosted directly on the verb: ra'iti OTO = re'itiW "I saw him"

Sergey

Воскресенье, 26 мая 2013, 21:08 +09:00 от David Gil <gil at EVA.MPG.DE<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3agil@EVA.MPG.DE>>:

If you include pronouns in the scope of the query, then Hebrew also has doubly-case-marked forms such as

ot=i ACC=PREP.1SG
ot=xa ACC=PREP.2SGM
ot=ax ACC=PREP.2SGF
etc.

However, as suggested by the interlinear gloss "PREP", the pronominal enclitics aren't really accusatives, but rather non-nominative, or "prepositional" forms, which occur after other prepositions as well, such as l- 'to', b- 'in' / 'instrumental' and others, eg.

l=i to=PREP.1SG
l(e)=xa to=PREP.2SGM
l=ax to=PREP.2SGF
etc.

This seems very similar to what José describes for Spanish, and not quite what Sergey is looking for.

David

On 26/05/2013 19:58, "José M. García-Miguel" wrote:
As Paolo says, DOM is a well-kown feature of some Romance languages giving place to prepositional marking of some Direct Objects.
But, I guess that the examples proposed by Paolo do not qualify as "having both the accusative case and analytical direct object markers (pre- or postpositions)", that Sergey was looking for. Nouns do not vary for case, and I would not say that Maria is accusative [case] in Ho visto a Maria.
However, personal independent pronouns and pronominal clitics do vary for case: Spanish yo [Nominative] 'I' vs mí [not-Nominative, prepositional case] 'me' vs me [1sg clitic], and in 3rd person clitics Accusative lo(s), la(s)  vs Dative le(s)
Thus, in Sp. Me ha visto a mi '(s)he has seen me', the object is expressed by 1sg clitic me,  the preposition a, and the non-Nominative mi

A 3rd person accusative clitic is compatible with an a-marked Directo Object in the same clause (this is a common pattern in some varieties of Spanish, mainly Buenos Aires Sp.,  and less common in other varieties):

La          he     visto a       Maria
3.ACC.F have seen PREP Maria
'I have seen Maria'

This example has "both the accusative case [in the clitic la] and an analytical direct object marker [preposition a]", but the accusative case is not in the name Maria.

All best,
Jose M. Garcia-Miguel
University of Vigo

El 26/05/2013 11:53, Paolo Ramat escribió:
Dear All,
DOM as obligatory marking of Direct Object (DO) is a well-known feature of (South)Italian dialects and other Romance varieties (e.g. Catalan)
I wouldn’t consider Ich gehe durch den Gang as an ex. of DO. As Sergey rightly states, we have here a PP  specifying the notion of ‘gehen’.
But when you have Ho visto a Maria ‘I saw Mary’ instead of standard Italian Ho visto Maria, Catal. les monges   no estimen a les nenes  ‘the nuns don’t lik the girls’, a is a real DO marker and the construction is Nomin./Accus. The use of DOM is subject to certain constraints: the OBJ has to be [+human] or, at least, [+anim],[+definite] etc.
References: A. Ledgeway, From Latin to Romance, OUP 2012. Iemmolo, Giorgio (2009), La marcatura differenziale dell’oggetto in siciliano antico.  Arch. Glottol. Ital. 94: 185-  225; Iemmolo, Giorgio and Gerson Klumpp (in preparation). Differential Object Marking: theoretical and empirical issues. Special issue of Linguistics.

All best
Paolo

From: Sergey Lyosov<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3asergelyosov@INBOX.RU>
Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2013 9:20 PM
To: LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3aLINGTYP@LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
Subject: Re: accusative + analytical DO markers

Dear Ewa,
thanks a lot!
Your Polish example is as follows:

-         zaatakować ‘attack, assault’ + NPACC
-         napaść ‘attack, assault’ + preposition na with a NPACC (a grammaticalized allative construction).
The cognate Russian verbs have the same government:
atakovat' ‘attack, assault’ + NPACC
napast' ‘attack, assault’ + preposition na with a NPACC

Our colleague Scott T. Shell suggests me (within this thread) a similar example from
German:

Den            Mann    habe    ich                gesehen.

DEF.ACC  man      AUX   1SG.NOM   saw

'I say the man.'

Ich                 gehe   durch     den               Gang

1SG.NOM    go       through  DEF.ACC    hallway

'I go through the hallway.'

 Yet neither Polish/Russian na nor German durch are Direct Object Markers pure and simple, they both retain their meanings as lative/locative prepositions. What I am looking for is a “pure” and (under certain conditions) obligatory Direct Object Marker (like `et in Hebrew) which synchronically has no other (more concrete) meanings. I wonder if this kind of DOM is at all compatible with ACC (which would amount to double marking of the Direct Object).

I will address your Coptic example in the next email.

  All best,

  Sergey

Суббота, 25 мая 2013, 16:37 UTC от "Zakrzewska, E.D." <E.D.Zakrzewska at uva.nl><https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3aE.D.Zakrzewska@uva.nl>:
Dear Sergey,

A good example is Polish, compare:
-         zaatakować ‘attack, assault’ + NPACC
-         napaść ‘attack, assault’ + preposition na with a NPACC (a grammaticalized allative construction).

Another example may be Coptic (Afroasiatic, the final stage of Ancient Egyptian). In Coptic there are two strategies to mark the direct object: head-marking and dependent-marking. Head-marking involves the use of the so-called construct or pronominal state allomorph of the verb to which a nominal, respectively pronominal direct object is attached. When the verb appears in the absolute state allomorph, dependent-marking of the object by means of a preposition is required. Several prepositions can occur in this function, of which n- (dedicated preposition) and e- (grammaticalization of the allative) are most important.
Basic information about Coptic grammar can be found in Reintges C.H., Coptic Egyptian (Sahidic dialect): a learner's grammar, Köln: Köppe, 2004. I’m currently working on a comprehensive article on transitivity in Coptic, to be published in the Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Coptic Studies in Rome and I can send you a copy soon.

Best regards,
Ewa Zakrzewska

________________________________
Van: Discussion List for ALT [LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3aLINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org>] namens Sergey Lyosov [sergelyosov at inbox.ru<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3asergelyosov@inbox.ru>]
Verzonden: vrijdag 24 mei 2013 19:35
To: LINGTYP at listserv.linguistlist.org<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3aLINGTYP@listserv.linguistlist.org>
Onderwerp: accusative + analytical DO markers

Dear colleagues,
Do we know of languages that have both the accusative case and analytical direct object markers (pre- or postpositions)?

Lots of thanks,
Sergey

Dr. Sergey Loesov
Oriental Institute
Russian State University for the Humanities
6 Miusskaya pl. Moscow 125267, Russia.

--
David Gil

Department of Linguistics
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany

Telephone: 49-341-3550321 Fax: 49-341-3550119
Email: gil at eva.mpg.de<https://e.mail.ru/sentmsg?mailto=mailto%3agil@eva.mpg.de>
Webpage:  http://www.eva.mpg.de/~gil/

--
Prof. Anvita Abbi
Centre for Linguistics
School of Language, Literature and Culture Studies
Jawaharlal Nehru University
New Delhi 110067
www.andamanese.net<http://www.andamanese.net/>
President: Linguistic Society of India
URL: http://www.jnu.ac.in/FacultyStaff/ShowProfile.asp?SendUserName=anvita

--
Eitan Grossman
Lecturer, Department of Linguistics/School of Language Sciences
Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Tel: +972 2 588 1885
Fax: +972 2 588 0265

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20130527/de2d8100/attachment.htm>