1887
Volume 42, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0378-4169
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9927
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper analyzes the syntax of and causee, experiencer, goal and possessor datives in Basque. It presents novel criteria distinguishing their categorical status: the possibility (i) to license Depictive Secondary Predication (DSP) and (ii) to appear as non-agreeing in contexts affected by the (PCC). It argues that, contrary to the rest of the datives, goals are generated as PPs, since they are unable to license DSP, but able to occur as non-agreeing in PCC-affected contexts. Besides, despite exhibiting the same categorical status as causee, experiencer and possessor datives, it claims that objects are syntactically identical to canonical absolutives, as they show the same configurational as well as Case licensing pattern, which is based on -Agree.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/li.00027.odr
2019-07-10
2019-09-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aissen, J.
    2003 Differential object marking: iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21, 435–483. 10.1023/A:1024109008573
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  2. Albizu, P.
    1997a The Syntax of Person Agreement. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California.
  3. 1997b Generalized person-case constraint: a case for a syntax-driven inflectional morphology. ASJU, 40, 1–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 2001 Datibo sintagmaren izaera sintaktikoaren inguruan: eztabaidarako oinarrizko zenbait datu. InB. Fernández, & P. Albizu (Eds.), Kasu eta komunztaduraren gainean. On Case and Agreement, 49–69. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 2009 Construcciones inacusativas con dativos posesivos y dativos de interés en vasco: un análisis derivacionalista. Seminario de Lingüística Teórica, CSIC, Madrid, May11.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Albizu, P. & Fernández, B.
    2002 Datives’ intervention effect on Ergativity in Basque. XII Colloquium of Generative Grammar, Universidad Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, April15–17.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Albizu, P., & Fernández, B.
    2006 Licit and illicit ERG-DAT pairings. InB. Fernández, & I. Laka (Eds.), Andolin gogoan. Essays in honour of Professor Eguskitza, 69–96. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Anagnostopoulou, E.
    2003The syntax of ditransitives. Evidence from clitics. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Arregi, E.
    2003 On Dative Alternations in Basque. Manuscript, UPV/EHU.
  10. Arregi, E., & Ormazabal, J.
    2003 Aditz ditrantsitiboen barne-egitura. InJ. M. Makazaga, & B. Oyharçabal (Eds.), Euskal gramatikari buruzko eta literaturari buruzko ikerketak XXI. mendearen atarian. Gramatika gaiak, 119–156. Bilbo: Euskaltzaindia.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Arregi, K. & Nevins, A.
    2008 A principled order to postsyntactic operations. Manuscript, Univesity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign & Harvard University.
  12. 2012Morphotactics: Basque auxiliaries and the structure of spellout. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑3889‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3889-8 [Google Scholar]
  13. Artiagoitia, X.
    2000Hatsarreak eta parametroak lantzen. Vitoria-Gasteiz: UPV/EHU & Arabako Foru Aldundia.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Baker, M.
    1997 Thematic Roles and Syntacctic Structure. InL. Haegeman (Ed.), Elements of Grammar, 73–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑011‑5420‑8_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_2 [Google Scholar]
  15. Bárany, A.
    2018 dom and dative case. Glossa: a journal or general linguistics, 3 (1): 97, 1–40. 10.5334/gjgl.639
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.639 [Google Scholar]
  16. Béjar, S., & Rezac, M.
    2003 Person licensing and the derivation of PCC effects. InA. T. Pérez-Leroux, & Y. Roberge (Eds.), Romance linguistics: Theory and acquisition, 49–62. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.244.07bej
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.244.07bej [Google Scholar]
  17. Berro, A. & Fernández, B.
    2018 Applicatives without verbs. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. doi:  10.1007/s11049‑018‑09437‑4.
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-09437-4 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bonet, E.
    1991 Morphology after Syntax: Pronominal Clitics in Romance. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  19. 1994 The Person-Case constraint: A morphological approach. InH. Harley & C. Phillips (Eds.), MIT Workinng Papers in Linguistics 22: The morphology-syntax connection. Cambridge, Mass.: MITWPL.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Bossong, G.
    1985Empirische Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objekt Markierung in der neuiranischen Sphrachen. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. 1991 Differential Object Marking in Romance and beyond. InD. Wanner, & D. A. Kibee (Eds.), New Analyses in Romance Linguistics, 143–170. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.69.14bos
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.69.14bos [Google Scholar]
  22. Brugè, L. & Brugger, G.
    1996 On the Accusative a in Spanish. Probus, 8 (1), 1–51. 10.1515/prbs.1996.8.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1996.8.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  23. Chomsky, N.
    2000 Minimalist inquiries: the framework. InR. Martin, D. Michaels & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step: essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2001Derivation by Phase. M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Cuervo, M. C.
    2003 Datives at Large. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  26. Demonte, V.
    1987 C-command, Preposition and Predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 18, 147–157.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. 1988 Remarks on secondary predicates. C-command, extraction and reanalysis. The Linguistic Review, 6 (1), 1–39. 10.1515/tlir.1987.6.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.1987.6.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  28. 1995 Dative Alternation in Spanish. Probus, 7, 5–30. 10.1515/prbs.1995.7.1.5
    https://doi.org/10.1515/prbs.1995.7.1.5 [Google Scholar]
  29. Demonte, V., & P. Masullo
    1999 La predicación. Los complementos predicativos. InI. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, 2461–2524. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, RAE.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Deustuko Hizkuntzalaritza Mintegia
    Deustuko Hizkuntzalaritza Mintegia 1989 Inkorporazioa perpaus kausatiboetan. InP. Salaburu (Ed.), Sintaxi teoria eta euskara. VII. Udako Ikastaroak, 87–119. Donostia: UPVEHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Etxepare, R.
    2006 Number long distance agreement in (substandard) Basque. InJ. A. Lakarra, & J. I. Hualde (Eds.), Studies in Basque and historical linguistics in memory of R. L. Trask. ASJU, 40, 303–350. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. 2014 Contact and Change in a restrictive theory of parameters. InC. Picallo (Ed.), Linguistic Variation in the Minimalist Framework, 108–139. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702894.003.0006
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198702894.003.0006 [Google Scholar]
  33. Etxepare, R. & Oyharçabal, B.
    2009 Bi datibo egitura ipar-ekialdeko zenbait hizkeratan. Lapurdum, 13, 145–158. 10.4000/lapurdum.2049
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lapurdum.2049 [Google Scholar]
  34. 2013 Datives and adpositions in northeastern Basque. InB. Fernández & R. Etxepare (Eds.), Variation in datives: a micro-comparative perspective, 50–95. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Fernández, B. & Landa, J.
    2009 Datibo komunztadura beti zaindu, inoiz zaindu ez eta batzuetan baino zaintzen ez demean. Hiru ahoko aldagaia, datu iturri bi, eta erreminta bat: Corsintax. Lapurdum, 13, 159–181. 10.4000/lapurdum.2053
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lapurdum.2053 [Google Scholar]
  36. Fernández, B., Ortiz de Urbina, J., & Landa, J.
    2009 Komunztadurarik gabeko datiboen gakoez. InR. Etxepare, R. Gómez, & J. A. Lakarra (Eds.), Beñat Oihartzabali gorazarre. ASJU, 43, 352–380.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Fernández, B., & Rezac, M.
    2010 Datibo osagarri bitxiak eta Datiboaren Lekualdatzea: ari nai diyot eta kanta egin nazu bidegurutzean. InB. Fernández, P. Albizu, & R. Etxepare (Eds.), Euskara eta euskarak: aldakortasun sintaktikoa aztergai. ASJU, 52, 113–149. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. 2016 Differential Object Marking in Basque varieties. InB. Fernández, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), Microparameters in the grammar of Basque, 93–139. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/lfab.13.05fer
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.13.05fer [Google Scholar]
  39. Fernández, B. & Sarasola, I.
    2010Marinelei abisua: izen ondoko datibo sintagmak izenburuen sintaxian. Lapurdum, 14, 55–75. 10.4000/lapurdum.2270
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lapurdum.2270 [Google Scholar]
  40. Fernández-Soriano, O.
    1999 Two types of impersonal sentences in Spanish: locative and dative subjects. Syntax, 2 (2), 101–140. 10.1111/1467‑9612.00017
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9612.00017 [Google Scholar]
  41. Harizanov, B.
    2014 Clitic doubling at the syntax-morphophonology interface. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 32, 1033–1088. 10.1007/s11049‑014‑9249‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9249-5 [Google Scholar]
  42. Hernanz, Mª Ll
    1988 En torno a la sintaxis y la semántica de los complementos predicativos en español. Estudis de Sintaxis, Estudi General, 8, 7–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Kalin, L.
    2018 Licensing and Differential Object Marking: The View from Neo-Aramaic. Syntax, 21 (2), 112–159. 10.1111/synt.12153
    https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12153 [Google Scholar]
  44. Keine, S., & Müller, G.
    2008 Differential argument encoding by impoverishmen. InM. Richards, & A. Malchukov (Eds.), Scales, Linguistiche Arbeits Berichte, 86, 83–136. Universitat Leipzig.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Koizumi, M.
    1994 Secondary predicates. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 3, 25–79. 10.1007/BF01733149
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01733149 [Google Scholar]
  46. Kramer, R.
    2014 Clitic doubling or object agreement: the view from Amharic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 32, 593–634. 10.1007/s11049‑014‑9233‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9233-0 [Google Scholar]
  47. Laka, I.
    1993 The structure of inflection: A case study in Xº syntax. InJ. I. Hualde, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), Generative studies in Basque linguistics, 21–70. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.105.02lak
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.105.02lak [Google Scholar]
  48. Leonetti, M.
    2004 Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 3, 75–114. 10.5565/rev/catjl.106
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.106 [Google Scholar]
  49. Levin, T.
    2019 On the nature of differential object marking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 37 (1), 167–213. 10.1007/s11049‑018‑9412‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9412-5 [Google Scholar]
  50. Masullo, P. J.
    1992 Incorporation and case theory in Spanish. A crosslinguistic perspective. Doctoral disseration, University of Washington.
  51. Matushansky, O.
    2006 On head movement in linguistic theory. Linguistic Inquiry, 37, 69–109. 10.1162/002438906775321184
    https://doi.org/10.1162/002438906775321184 [Google Scholar]
  52. McFadden, T.
    2004 The position of morphological case in the derivation: a study on the syntax-morphology interface. Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
  53. Mounole, C.
    2012 Evolution of the transitive verbs in Basque and apparition of datively marked patients. InG. Authier, & K. Haude (Eds.), Ergativity, Transitivity, and Voice, 335–379. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110227734.355
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110227734.355 [Google Scholar]
  54. Nevins, A.
    2011 Multiple agree with clitics: person complementarity vs. omnivorous number. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 29, 939–971. 10.1007/s11049‑011‑9150‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9150-4 [Google Scholar]
  55. Odria, A.
    2014 Differential Object Marking and the nature of dative case in Basque varieties. Linguistic Variation, 14 (2), 289–317. 10.1075/lv.14.2.03odr
    https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.14.2.03odr [Google Scholar]
  56. 2015 Euskarazko bigarren mailako predikazioaren murriztapen sintaktikoez. InB. Fernández, & P. Salaburu (Eds.), Ibon Sarasola gorazarre. Homenatge. Homenaje, 449–515. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 2017 Differential Object Marking and datives in Basque syntax. Doctoral dissertation, UPV/EHU.
  58. 2019 DIfferntial Object Marking in Basque and Spanish dialects. InA. Berro, B. Fernández, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), Basque and Romance: Aligning grammars. 243–275. Leiden/Boston: Brill.
  59. Ormazabal, J.
    2000 A conspiracy theory of case and agreement. InR. Martin (Eds.), Step by step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. 235–260. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Ormazabal, J. & Romero, J.
    1998 On the syntactic nature of the Me-lui and the Person Case Constraint. ASJU, 32 (2), 415–433.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. 2001 A brief description of some agreement restrictions. InB. Fernández & P. Albizu (Eds.), Kasu eta komunztaduraren gainean. On case and agreement, 215–241. Bilbo: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. 2007 Object agreement restrictions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 25, 315–347.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Ormazabal, J., & Romero, J.
    2010 The derivation of dative alternations. InM. Duguine, S. Huidobro, & N. Madariaga (Eds.), Argument Structure and Syntactic Relations from a Crosslinguistic Perspective, 203–232. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.158.13orm
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.158.13orm [Google Scholar]
  64. Ormazabal, J. & Romero, J.
    2013a Differential Object Marking, Case and Agreement. Borealis. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 2 (2), 221–239. 10.7557/1.2.2.2808
    https://doi.org/10.7557/1.2.2.2808 [Google Scholar]
  65. 2013b Non Accusative Objects. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 12, 155–173. 10.5565/rev/catjl.65
    https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.65 [Google Scholar]
  66. 2013c Object clitics, agreement and dialectal variation. Probus, 25, 301–354.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. 2017 Historical Changes in Basque Dative Alternations: evidence for a P-based (neo)derivational analysis. Glossa, 2 (1), 1–39. 10.5334/gjgl.103
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.103 [Google Scholar]
  68. Ortiz de Urbina, J.
    1995 Datibo komunztaduraren gainean. InR. Gómez, & J. A. Lakarra (Eds.), Euskal Dialektologiako Kongresua. ASJU, 28, 579–588. Donostia: Gipuzkoako Foru Aldundia.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. 2003a Causatives. InJ. I. Hualde, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), A grammar of Basque, 592–607. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110895285.592
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895285.592 [Google Scholar]
  70. 2003b Semiauxiliary verbs. InJ. I. Hualde, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), A grammar of Basque, 300–312. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Oyharçabal, B., & Etxepare, R.
    2012 The absence of Person/Case constraints in Early Lapurdian Basque. InJ. Lakarra, J. Gorrotxategi, & B. Urgell (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the Luis Michelena Chair, 149–169. Vitoria-Gasteiz: UPV/EHU.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Oyharçabal, B.
    2010 Basque ditransitives. InM. Duguine, S. Huidobro, & N. Madariaga (Eds.), Argument structure and syntactic relations: A cross-linguistic perspective, 233–260. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.158.14oyh
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.158.14oyh [Google Scholar]
  73. Perlmutter, D.
    1971Deep and surface constraints in syntax. New York: Rinehart & Winston Inc.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Preminger, O.
    2009 Breaking agreements: Distinguishing agreement and clitic doubling by their failures. Linguistic Inquiry, 40, 619–666. 10.1162/ling.2009.40.4.619
    https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.4.619 [Google Scholar]
  75. 2014Agreement and its failures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262027403.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  76. Rezac, M.
    2006 Agreement displacement in Basque: Derivational principles and lexical parameters. Manuscript, UPV/EHU.
  77. 2007 Escaping the Person Case Constraint: referential computation in the phi system. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 6, 97–138. 10.1075/livy.6.06rez
    https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.6.06rez [Google Scholar]
  78. 2008a Phi-Agree and theta-related Case. InD. Harbour, D. Adger, & S. Béjar (Eds.), Phi-teory: phi-features across interfaces and modules, 83–130. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. 2008b The syntax of eccentric agreement: The Person Case Constraint and Absolutive Displacement in Basque. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 26, 61–106. 10.1007/s11049‑008‑9032‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-008-9032-6 [Google Scholar]
  80. 2009a Person restrictions in Basque intransitives. Lapurdum, 13, 305–322. 10.4000/lapurdum.2172
    https://doi.org/10.4000/lapurdum.2172 [Google Scholar]
  81. 2009b On the unifiability of repairs of the Person Case Constraint: French, Basque, Georgian, and Chinook. InR. Etxepare, R. Gómez, & J. A. Lakarra (Eds.), Beñat Oihartzabali gorazarre. ASJU, 43 (1–2), 769–790.
    [Google Scholar]
  82. 2011Phi-features and the modular architecture of language. London/New York: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑9698‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9698-2 [Google Scholar]
  83. Rezac, M., Albizu, P., & Etxepare, R.
    2014 The structural ergative of Basque and the theory of Case. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 32 (4), 1273–1330. 10.1007/s11049‑014‑9239‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-014-9239-7 [Google Scholar]
  84. Richards, N.
    2010Uttering trees. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262013765.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262013765.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  85. de Rijk, R. P.
    2008Standard Basque. A Progressive Grammar. Cambridge/London: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M.
    2007 The Syntax of Objects: Agree and Differential Object Marking. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
  87. Rodriguez-Ordoñez, I.
    2016 dom in Basque: grammaticalization, attitudes and ideological representations. Doctoral dissertation, University of IllinoisatUrbana-Champaign.
  88. Romero, J.
    1997 Construcciones de doble objeto y gramática universal. Doctoral dissertation, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
  89. Rothstein, S.
    1983 The syntactic forms of predication. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.
  90. Taraldsen, K. T.
    1995 On agreement and nominative objects in Icelandic. InH. Haider, S. Olsen, & S. Vikner (Eds), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax, 207–237. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑8416‑6_14
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8416-6_14 [Google Scholar]
  91. Torrego, E.
    2010 Variability in the case pattern of causative formation in Romance and its implications. Linguistic Inquiry, 41, 445–470. 10.1162/LING_a_00004
    https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00004 [Google Scholar]
  92. Williams, E. S.
    1980 Predication. Linguistic Inquiry, 11, 203–237.
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Zabala, I.
    1993 Predikazioaren teoriak Gramatika Sortzailean (Euskararen kasua). Doctoral dissertation, UPV/EHU.
  94. 2003 Nominal Predication: copulative sentences and secondary predication. InJ. I. Hualde, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), A Grammar of Basque, 426–446. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110895285.426
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110895285.426 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/li.00027.odr
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Basque , datives , Differential Object Marking (dom) and syntax
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error