temporary Recipient marking

[Denis CREISSELS]

Dear Misha,
Mandinkahas two differents verbs, with however an interesting difference in their construction:díi (which does not imply more than transfer) takes the theme as its object andthe recipient as an oblique argument, whereas só (which implies that the themewill remain at the disposal of the recipient) takes the recipient as its objectand the theme as an oblique argument. You can find the relevant examples on p.4 of my paper ‘Valency properties of Mandinka verbs’
http://www.deniscreissels.fr/public/Creissels-Valency_classes_Mandinka.pdf
Best,
Denis

Michael Daniel <misha.daniel at GMAIL.COM> wrote:Dear all,

most East Caucasian (alias Nakh-Daghestanian) languages have two options to mark the Recipient with the verb 'give'. One uses the dative case and may be called the dative strategy of Recipient marking. The other uses one of the spatial, more specifically (al)lative forms (there are many), and may be termed the lative strategy. A similar construction is also attested in another language of the Caucasus, Ossetic, which suggests an areal connection. 

The difference between the two strategies is often explained as the difference between permanent and temporary Recipients. 

"I gave Mohammed-Dat the book" 
'I gave (offered) the book to M.'

vs. 

"I gave Mohammed-Lat the book" 
'I gave (lent) the book to M.'

Of course, I omit a great lot of language specific details; one important note, however, is that the opposition may also be interpreted as that of transfer (of possession) vs. caused motion - something like 'give' vs. 'hand'. In a sense, these languages distinguish two components in the semantics of give, that are (almost) always inseparable - that of caused motion and that of transfer. 

My question is - could anyone give me references for or just mention language names that do the same or similar kind of distinction on nouns - by means of case or adposition or other means. Any other grammatical means to express this opposition (or opposition close to this) is also very much welcome as a typological background. (I can probably think of a variation in the marking of the Theme - the Given Object). 

Michael Daniel

PS
I am aware that a similar contrast or at least a related metaphor has been proposed for the opposition between the English. This is the parallel I am aware of (even though I do not think it works well here). 

If anyone is interested in the data from or reference for East Caucasian, I will be happy to provide it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20140903/98a12974/attachment.htm>