1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Differential argument marking and discourse prominence
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Many languages exhibit some form of differential argument marking (DAM), where the same generalized argument role can be marked differently. Approaches explaining these phenomena have in common that they assume some form of ranking among linguistic elements of the same kind. While previous approaches emphasize this relative ranking based on semantic features (e.g., animacy, definiteness, transitivity) or information structure (e.g., topicality), several observations from the literature suggest that differential argument marking might also depend on discourse factors. In this contribution, we explore recent empirical work on differential argument marking in selected languages (Spanish, Romanian, Bulgarian, Tima, Yali) and illustrate the discourse sensitivity of these phenomena. In particular, we present evidence that discourse prominence, i.e., the dynamic ranking and keeping track of referents in discourse, interacts with the phenomena under discussion. This contribution offers new perspectives on the interplay of differential argument marking and discourse prominence, highlighting perspectives for future research.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
2026-03-09
2026-04-21

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/sl.23060.pau/sl.23060.pau.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Aissen, Judith
    2003 Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory(). –. 10.1023/A:1024109008573
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [Google Scholar]
  2. Andersen, Torben
    1988 Ergativity in Päri, a Nilotic OVS language. Lingua. –. 10.1016/0024‑3841(88)90008‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(88)90008-3 [Google Scholar]
  3. Anderson, Neil & Martha Wade
    1988 Ergativity and control in Folopa. Language and Linguistics in Melanesia. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Arkadiev, Peter
    2016 Роли, иерархии и двойное маркирование объектов [Roles, hierarchies and the double-marking of objects]. Vorposy jazykoznanija. –. 10.31857/S0373658X0001056‑0
     https://doi.org/10.31857/S0373658X0001056-0 [Google Scholar]
  5. Asenova, Petya [Асенова, Петя]
    2002 Балканско езикознание [Balkan linguistics]. Sofia: Faber.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Bárány, András
    2017 Person, case, and agreement: The morphosyntax of inverse agreement and global case splits. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Bardají, Maria, Gertrud Schneider-Blum, Markus Philipp & Sarah Dolscheid
    2025 Why agent prominence persists even under challenging conditions. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics(). 10.16995/glossa.11581
     https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.11581 [Google Scholar]
  8. Barraza, Georgina
    2003 Evolución del objeto directo inanimado en español. Ciudad de México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México Ph.D. dissertation.
  9. Becker, Laura & Gertrud Schneider-Blum
    2020 Morphological marking of contrast in Tima. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics(). . 10.5334/gjgl.1098
     https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1098 [Google Scholar]
  10. Becker, Martin & Jakob Egetenmeyer
    2018 A prominence-based account of temporal discourse structure. Lingua. –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2018.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2018.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  11. Belloro, Valeria A.
    2007 Spanish clitic doubling: A study of syntax-pragmatics. Albany: State University of New York Ph.D. dissertation.
  12. 2015 To the right of the verb: An investigation of clitic doubling and right dislocation in three Spanish dialects. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Bickel, Balthasar, Alena Witzlack-Makarevich & Taras Zakharko
    2014 Typological evidence against universal effects of referential scales on case alignment. InIna Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Andrej L. Malchukov & Marc Richards (eds.), Scales and hierarchies: A cross-disciplinary perspective on referential hierarchies, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Bossong, Georg
    1985 Empirische Universalienforschung: Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 1998 Le marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues d’Europe. InJack Feuillet (ed.), Eurotyp 2, Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110804485.193
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110804485.193 [Google Scholar]
  16. Casaretto, Antje, Gerrit J. Dimmendaal, Birgit Hellwig, Uta Reinöhl & Gertrud Schneider-Blum
    2020 Roots of ergativity in Africa (and beyond). Studies in African Linguistics(). –. 10.32473/sal.v49i1.122270
     https://doi.org/10.32473/sal.v49i1.122270 [Google Scholar]
  17. Chafe, Wallace L.
    (ed.) 1980 The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural, and linguistic aspects of narrative production (Advances in Discourse Processes 3). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Chappell, Hilary & Jean-Christophe Verstraete
    2019 Optional and alternating case marking: Typology and diachrony. Language and Linguistics Compass(). e12311. 10.1111/lnc3.12311
     https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12311 [Google Scholar]
  19. Chiriacescu, Sofiana
    2014 The discourse structuring potential of indefinite noun phrases: special markers in English, German and Romanian. Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart Ph.D. dissertation.
  20. Chiriacescu, Sofiana & Klaus von Heusinger
    2010 Discourse prominence and pe-marking in Romanian. International Review of Pragmatics(). –. 10.1163/187731010X528377
     https://doi.org/10.1163/187731010X528377 [Google Scholar]
  21. Christensen, Steve
    2010 Yongkom discourse: Ergativity and topic. InJoan Hooley (ed.), Papers on six languages of Papua New Guinea, –. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Compensis, Paul
    2022 Differential object indexing in Bulgarian: The role of discourse prominence and predictability. Cologne: University of Cologne Ph.D. dissertation.
  23. Comrie, Bernard
    1989 Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. 2nd edn.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Creider, Chet A. & Jane T. Creider
    1983 Topic — comment relations in a verb-initial language. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/jall‑1983‑050102
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jall-1983-050102 [Google Scholar]
  25. 1989 A grammar of Nandi. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Creissels, Denis, Gerrit J. Dimmendaal, Zygmunt Frajzyngier & Christa König
    2009 Africa as a morphosyntactic area. InBernd Heine & Derek Nurse (eds.), A linguistic geography of Africa, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Croft, William
    2003 Typology and universals. 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Cyxun, Gennadij [Цихун, Генадий]
    1962 Местоименната енклитика и словоредът в българското изречение [Clitic pronouns and word order in Bulgarian spoken language]. Български Език [Bulgarian Language] (). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Dalrymple, Mary & Irina Nikolaeva
    2011 Objects and information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511993473
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511993473 [Google Scholar]
  30. van Dijk, Teun A.
    1981 Episodes as units of discourse analysis. InDeborah Tannen (ed.), Analyzing discourse: Text and talk, –. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Dimmendaal, Gerrit J.
    1986 Prominence hierarchies and Turkana syntax. InGerrit J. Dimmendahl (ed.), Publications in African languages and linguistics, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110883350‑012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110883350-012 [Google Scholar]
  32. 2014 Marked nominative systems in Eastern Sudanic and their historical origin. Afrikanistik Online().
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Dixon, R. M. W.
    1979 Ergativity. Language. –. 10.2307/412519
     https://doi.org/10.2307/412519 [Google Scholar]
  34. Enç, Mürvet
    1991 The semantics of specificity. Linguistic Inquiry. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Endriss, Cornelia & Hans-Martin Gärtner
    2005 Relativische Verb-Zweit Sätze und Definitheit. InFranz-Josef d’Avis (ed.), Proceedings of the Symposium Deutsche Syntax: Empirie und Theorie, –. Göteburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Farkas, Donka F.
    1978 Direct and indirect object reduplication in Romanian. InDonka F. Farkas, Wesly M. Jacobsen & Karol W. Todrys (eds.), Papers from the Seventeenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, April 13–14 1978, –. Chicago: University of Chicago.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Fedden, Sebastian
    2020 Morphology of Trans New Guinea languages. Oxford research encyclopedia of linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.633
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.633 [Google Scholar]
  38. Fischer, Susann, Mario Navarro & Jorge Vega Vilanova
    2019 The clitic doubling parameter: Development and distribution of a cyclic change. InMiriam Bouzouita, Anne Breitbarth, Lieven Danckaert & Elisabeth Witzenhausen (eds.), Cycles in language change, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198824961.003.0004
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198824961.003.0004 [Google Scholar]
  39. Foley, William A.
    2000 The languages of New Guinea. Annual Review of Anthropology(). –. 10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.357
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.357 [Google Scholar]
  40. Friedman, Victor. A.
    2008 Balkan object reduplication in areal and dialectological perspective. InDalina Kallulli & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.), Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.130.05fri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.130.05fri [Google Scholar]
  41. Fuß, Erik
    2005 The rise of agreement, a formal approach to the syntax and grammaticalization of verbal inflection. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.81
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.81 [Google Scholar]
  42. García García, Marco
    2014 Differentielle Objektmarkierung bei unbelebten Objekten im Spanischen. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110290974
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110290974 [Google Scholar]
  43. 2018 Nominal and verbal parameters in the diachrony of DOM in Spanish. InIlja A. Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking, –. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. García García, Marco & Javier Caro Reina
    . Forthcoming. Differential object marking. InMatthias Heinz, Marc-Olivier Hinzelin & Lorenzo Filipponio eds. Manual of classification and typology of the Romance languages (Manuals of Romance Linguistics). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. García-Miguel, José M.
    2015 Variable coding and object alignment in Spanish: A corpus-based approach. Folia Linguistica(). –. 10.1515/flin‑2015‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2015-0007 [Google Scholar]
  46. Georgieva, Elena [Георгиева, Елена]
    1974 Словоред на простото изречение в българския книжовен език [Word order of the simple sentence in Bulgarian standard language]. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Science.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Givón, Talmy
    1981 On the development of the numeral ‘one’ as an indefinite marker. Folia Linguistica Historica. –. 10.1515/flih.1981.2.1.35
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.1981.2.1.35 [Google Scholar]
  48. 1983 Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction. InTalmy Givón (ed.), Topic continuity in discourse, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.3.01giv
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.3.01giv [Google Scholar]
  49. Guentchéva, Zlatka
    1994 Thématisation de l’objet en bulgare. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. 2008 Object clitic doubling constructions and topicality in Bulgarian. InDalina Kallulli & Liliane Tasmowski (eds.), Clitic doubling in the Balkan languages, –). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.130.12gue
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.130.12gue [Google Scholar]
  51. Haig, Geoffrey L. J. & Stefan Schnell
    2014 Annotations using GRAID (Grammatical Relations and Animacy in Discourse) (v7.0). Manuscript.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Haspelmath, Martin
    2013 Argument indexing: A conceptual framework for the syntactic status of bound person forms. InDik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110331127.197
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110331127.197 [Google Scholar]
  53. 2019 Indexing and flagging, and head and dependent marking. Te Reo(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. 2021a Explaining grammatical coding asymmetries: Form–frequency correspondences and predictability. Journal of Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S0022226720000535
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000535 [Google Scholar]
  55. 2021b Role-reference associations and the explanation of argument coding splits. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2020‑0252
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2020-0252 [Google Scholar]
  56. Heeschen, Volker
    1998 An ethnographic grammar of the Eipo language spoken in the central mountains of Irian Jaya (West New Guinea), Indonesia. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
     [Google Scholar]
  57. Heine, Bernd
    1980 Camus, a Maa dialect. InBernd Heine (ed.), The non-Bantu languages of Kenya, –. Berlin: Dietrich Reimer.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. von Heusinger, Klaus
    2008 Verbal semantics and the diachronic development of DOM in Spanish. Probus(). –. 10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/PROBUS.2008.001 [Google Scholar]
  59. von Heusinger, Klaus, Tiago A. Duarte & Marco García García
    2024 Differential object marking and discourse prominence in Spanish. Isogloss(). –. 10.5565/rev/isogloss.394
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/isogloss.394 [Google Scholar]
  60. von Heusinger, Klaus, Marco García García & Georg Kaiser
    2024 Differential object marking and (non-)specificity in Spanish — some empirical evidence for Leonetti’s Generalization. InIgnacio Bosque Muñoz, Silvia Gumiel Molina & Cristina Sánchez López (eds.), Buceando entre palabras. Inmersiones en gramática de la mano de Manuel Leonetti, –. Alcalá de Henares: Editorial Universidad de Alcalá.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. von Heusinger, Klaus & Petra B. Schumacher
    2019 Discourse prominence: Definition and application. Journal of Pragmatics. –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2019.07.025
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.07.025 [Google Scholar]
  62. von Heusinger, Klaus & Alina Tigău
    2020 Clitic doubling, DOM and discourse prominence in Romanian. Paper presented at the10th International Workshop on Referential Expressions in Discourse: Prominent Inferences, University of Cologne, 17–18 September 2020.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Hill, Virginia & Alexandru Mardale
    2019 Patterns for differential object marking in the history of Romanian. Journal of Historical Syntax(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. 2021 The diachrony of differential object marking in Romanian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780192898791.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780192898791.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  65. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Beatrice Primus
    2015 Prominence beyond prosody — a first approximation. InAmedeo de Dominicis (ed.), pS-prominenceS: Prominence in Linguistics, –. Viterbo: Disucom Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Sonja Riesberg
    . Forthcoming. Discourse patterns and emerging grammar in Papuan languages. InNicholas Evans & Sebastian Fedden eds. The Oxford guide to the Papuan languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  67. Hofmann, Thomas R.
    1989 Paragraphs and anaphora. Journal of Pragmatics(). –. 10.1016/0378‑2166(89)90093‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(89)90093-3 [Google Scholar]
  68. Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson
    1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language(). –. 10.1353/lan.1980.0017
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1980.0017 [Google Scholar]
  69. Iemmolo, Giorgio
    2010 Topicality and differential object marking: Evidence from Romance and beyond. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.34.2.01iem
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.34.2.01iem [Google Scholar]
  70. 2011 Towards a typological study of differential object marking and differential object indexation. Pavia: Università degli Studi di Pavia Ph.D. dissertation.
  71. Jaeger, T. Florian & Veronica A. Gerassimova
    2002 Bulgarian word order and the role of the direct object clitic in LFG. InMiriam Butt & Tracy H. King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG 02 Conference, –. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Jaeggli, Osvaldo
    1982 Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. 1986 The syntax of pronominal clitics. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Jasinskaja, Katja & Elena Karagjosova
    2020 Rhetorical relations. InDaniel Gutzmann, Lisa Matthewson, Cecile Meier, Hotze Rullmann & Thomas E. Zimmerman (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to semantics, –. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781118788516.sem061
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118788516.sem061 [Google Scholar]
  75. Jerono, Prisca
    2011 Tugen word order: A minimalist perspective. Nairobi: University of Nairobi Ph.D. dissertation.
  76. Just, Erika
    2022 A functional approach to differential indexing: Combining perspectives from typology and corpus linguistics. Leiden: Leiden University Ph.D. dissertation.
  77. 2024 A structural and functional comparison of differential A and P indexing. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2021‑0124
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2021-0124 [Google Scholar]
  78. Just, Erika & Slavomír Čéplö
    2022 Differential object indexing in Maltese — a corpus based pilot study. InTurek Przemyslwa & Julia Nintemann (eds.), Maltese: Contemporary changes and historical innovations, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110783834‑005
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110783834-005 [Google Scholar]
  79. König, Christa
    2008 Case in Africa. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780199232826.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199232826.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  80. König, Christa, Bernd Heine & Karsten Legère
    2015 The Akie language of Tanzania: A sketch of discourse grammar. Tokyo: Research Institute for Languages, Cultures of Asia & Africa.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Krapova, Iliyana & Guglielmo Cinque
    2006 Two asymmetries between clitic left and clitic right dislocation in Bulgarian. InHans Broekhuis, Norbert Corver, Riny Huybregts, Ursula Kleinhenz & Jan Koster (eds.), Organizing grammar: Linguistic studies in honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Kießling, Roland
    2007 The “marked nominative” in Datooga. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/JALL.2007.009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/JALL.2007.009 [Google Scholar]
  83. Laca, Brenda
    1995 Sobre el uso del acusativo preposicional en español. InCarmen Pensado (ed.), El complemento directo preposicional, –. Madrid: Visor.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. 2006 El objeto directo. La marcación preposicional. InConcepción Company Company (ed.), Sintaxis histórica de la lengua española. Primera parte: La frase verbal, –. México, D.F.: Universidad Nacional de México.
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Lazard, Gilbert
    2003 What is an object in a cross-linguistic perspective. InGiuliana Fiorentino (ed.), Romance objects. Transitivity in Romance languages, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110919837.1
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919837.1 [Google Scholar]
  86. Leafgren, John R.
    1997 Bulgarian clitic doubling: Overt topicality. Journal of Slavic Linguistics(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  87. 2002 Degrees of explicitness: Information structure and the packaging of Bulgarian subjects and objects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.102
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.102 [Google Scholar]
  88. Leonetti, Manuel
    2004 Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics. –. 10.5565/rev/catjl.106
     https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/catjl.106 [Google Scholar]
  89. Levergood, Barbara J.
    1987 Topics in Arusa phonology and morphology (Tanzania). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Ph.D. dissertation.
  90. Matić, Dejan & Daniel Wedgwood
    2013 The meanings of focus: The significance of an interpretation-based category in cross-linguistic analysis. Journal of Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S0022226712000345
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226712000345 [Google Scholar]
  91. McGregor, William B.
    1992 The semantics of ergative marking in Gooniyandi. Linguistics. –. 10.1515/ling.1992.30.2.275
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1992.30.2.275 [Google Scholar]
  92. 2006 Focal and optional ergative marking in Warrwa (Kimberley, Western Australia). Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2005.02.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  93. 2010 Optional ergative case marking systems in a typological-semiotic perspective. Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.010
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.010 [Google Scholar]
  94. 2013 Optionality in grammar and language use. Linguistics. –. 10.1515/ling‑2013‑0047
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013-0047 [Google Scholar]
  95. Meakins, Felicity & Carmel O’Shannessy
    2010 Ordering arguments about: Word order and discourse motivations in the development and use of the ergative marker in two Australian mixed languages. Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.013
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.013 [Google Scholar]
  96. Melis, Chantal
    2018 Spanish indexing DOM, topicality, and the case hierarchy. InIlja. A. Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking, –. Berlin: Language Science Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  97. 2021 From topic marking to definite object marking: Focusing on the beginnings of Spanish DOM. InJohannes Kabatek, Philipp Obrist & Albert Wall (eds.), Differential object marking in Romance, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110716207‑003
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110716207-003 [Google Scholar]
  98. Mietzner, Angelika
    2016 Cherang’any: A Kalenjin language of Kenya. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
     [Google Scholar]
  99. Miller, Cynthia L. & Leoma G. Gilley
    2001 Evidence for ergativity in Shilluk. Journal of African Languages and Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/jall.22.1.33
     https://doi.org/10.1515/jall.22.1.33 [Google Scholar]
  100. Minčeva, Angelina [Минчева, Ангелина]
    1969 Опит за интерпретация на модела на удвоените допълнения в българския език [An attempt for an interpretation model of doubled complements in the Bulgarian language]. Известия на Института за български език [Proceedings of the Institute for the Bulgarian Language] . –.
     [Google Scholar]
  101. Moodie, Jonathan & Rosey Billington
    2020 A grammar of Lopit: An Eastern Nilotic language of South Sudan. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  102. Mürmann, Sophie
    2023 Differential object marking and role semantics in Romance. Cologne: University of Cologne Ph.D. dissertation.
  103. Nikolaeva, Irina
    1999 Object agreement, grammatical relations, and information structure. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.23.2.05nik
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23.2.05nik [Google Scholar]
  104. 2001 Secondary topic as a relation in information structure. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling.2001.006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.006 [Google Scholar]
  105. Onea, Edgar & Daniel Hole
    2017 Differential object marking of human definite direct objects in Romanian. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  106. Onea, Edgar & Alexandru Mardale
    2020 From topic to object: Grammaticalization of differential object marking in Romanian. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue Canadienne De Linguistique(). –. 10.1017/cnj.2020.12
     https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2020.12 [Google Scholar]
  107. Ovcharova, Bilyana
    2018 Clitic doubling of the proposed direct object in Bulgarian. Slavia Meridionalis. . 10.11649/sm.1606
     https://doi.org/10.11649/sm.1606 [Google Scholar]
  108. Ozerov, Pavel
    2018 Tracing the sources of information structure: Towards the study of interactional management of information. Journal of Pragmatics. –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.017
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.017 [Google Scholar]
  109. 2021 Multifactorial information management (MIM): Summing up the emerging alternative to information structure. Linguistics Vanguard(). –. 10.1515/lingvan‑2020‑0039
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0039 [Google Scholar]
  110. Pensado, Carmen
    1995 La creación del complemento directo preposicional y la flexión de los pronombres personales en las lenguas románicas. InCarmen Pensado (ed.), El complemento directo preposicional, –. Madrid: Visor.
     [Google Scholar]
  111. Popov, Konstantin [Попов, Константин]
    1983 Граматика на съвременния български книжовен език. Том 3: Синтаксис [Grammar of the contemporary Bulgarian language. Vol. III: Syntax]. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  112. Reh, Mechthild
    1996 Anywa language: Description and internal reconstructions. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe.
     [Google Scholar]
  113. Riesberg, Sonja
    2018 Optional ergative, agentivity and discourse prominence — Evidence from Yali (Trans-New Guinea). Linguistic Typology(). –. 10.1515/lingty‑2018‑0002
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2018-0002 [Google Scholar]
  114. Riesberg, Sonja, Maria Bardají i Farré, Kurt Malcher & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
    2022 Predicting voice choice in symmetrical voice languages. All the things that do not work for Totoli. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.20061.rie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20061.rie [Google Scholar]
  115. Riesberg, Sonja, T. Mark Ellison, Maria Bardají & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
    . Submitted. Word order and the interaction of prominence hierarchies A case study from Totoli, a western Austronesian symmetrical voice language.
     [Google Scholar]
  116. Romero Heredero, Diego
    2022 Marcado diferencial de objeto y semántica verbal en español. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110751734
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110751734 [Google Scholar]
  117. Rudin, Catherine
    1990 Topic and focus in Bulgarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  118. Ruiz Zafón, Carlos
    2007 [2001] Сянката на вятъра [The shadow of the wind; Bulgarian version translated by Svetla Hristova]. Sofia: Iztok-Zapad.
     [Google Scholar]
  119. Same, Fahime
    2022 Referring expression generation in context: Combining linguistic and computational evidence. Cologne: University of Cologne Ph.D. dissertation.
  120. Sánchez, Liliana & Pablo Zdrojewski
    2013 Restricciones semánticas y pragmáticas al doblado de clíticos en el español de Buenos Aires y de Lima. Lingüística(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  121. Schiborr, Nils N., Stefan Schnell & Hanna Thiele
    2018 RefIND: Referent indexing in natural-language discourse: Annotation guidelines (v1.0). Manuscript.
     [Google Scholar]
  122. Schneider-Blum, Gertrud
    2022 On noncausal/causal alternations in Tima (Nuba Mountains, Sudan). Linguistique et Langues Africaines(). –. 10.4000/lla.4545
     https://doi.org/10.4000/lla.4545 [Google Scholar]
  123. 2023 The impact of attentional centering on ergative marking in Tima. STUF: Language Typology and Universals(). –. 10.1515/stuf‑2023‑2001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2023-2001 [Google Scholar]
  124. Schneider-Blum, Gertrud & Birgit Hellwig
    2018 Reference tracking in Tima and its interplay with split ergative marking. Studies in Language(). –. 10.1075/sl.17030.sch
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.17030.sch [Google Scholar]
  125. Schneider-Blum, Gertrud, Sonja Riesberg, Birgit Hellwig & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann
    2022 On resolving prominence conflicts — exceptional case marking in Tima and Yali. InChiara Gianollo, Łukasz Jędrzejowski & Sofiana I. Lindemann (eds.), Paths through meaning and form, –. Cologne: USB Monographs. 10.18716/omp.3.c54
     https://doi.org/10.18716/omp.3.c54 [Google Scholar]
  126. Schikowski, Robert & Giorgio Iemmolo
    2015 Commonalities and differences between differential object marking and indexing. Available at: https://www.isle.uzh.ch/schikowski/publications/2015-dom-vs-doi.pdf (last access18 March 2025)
  127. Schultze-Berndt, Eva
    2017 Interaction of ergativity and information structure in Jaminjung (Australia). InJessica Coon, Diane Massam & Lisa Demena Travis (eds.), The Oxford handbook of ergativity, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739371.013.44
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198739371.013.44 [Google Scholar]
  128. 2018 Expanding GRAID annotations with information structure annotations: A first suggestion. Talk presented at theWorkshop on Information Structure, Referential Status and Referent Type in Discourse and Grammar, Manchester, 27–28 June 2018.
  129. Skopeteas, Stavros & Gisbert Fanselow
    2010 Focus types and argument asymmetries: A cross-linguistic study in language production. InCarsten Breul & Edward Göbbel (eds.), Comparative and contrastive studies of information structure, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/la.165.07sko
     https://doi.org/10.1075/la.165.07sko [Google Scholar]
  130. Scott, Graham
    1986 On ergativity in Fore and other Papuan languages. Papers in New Guinea Linguistics. –. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  131. Siewierska, Anna
    2004 Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511812729
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812729 [Google Scholar]
  132. Siewierska, Anna & Dik Bakker
    2012 Case and alternative strategies: Word order and agreement marking. InAndrej L. Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of case, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199206476.013.0020
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199206476.013.0020 [Google Scholar]
  133. Silverstein, Michael
    1976 Hierarchy of features and ergativity. InR. M. W. Dixon (ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages, –. Canberra: Australian National University.
     [Google Scholar]
  134. Stojanov, Stojan [Стоянов, Стоян]
    1983 Граматика на съвременния български книжовен език. Том 2: Морфология [Grammar of the contemporary Bulgarian language. Vol. 2: Morphology]. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  135. Storch, Anne
    2014 A grammar of Luwo: An anthropological approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/clu.12
     https://doi.org/10.1075/clu.12 [Google Scholar]
  136. Suter, Edgar
    2010 The optional ergative in Kâte. InJohn Bowden, Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Malcolm Ross (eds.), A journey through Austronesian and Papuan linguistic and cultural space. Papers in the honour of Andrew Pawley, –. Canberra: Pacific Linguisitcs.
     [Google Scholar]
  137. Tigău, Alina
    2022 An experimental study on the discourse properties of Romanian direct objects. Studii de lingvistică(). –.
     [Google Scholar]
  138. Tomić, Olga. M.
    2008 Variation in clitic doubling in South Slavic. InSjef Barbiers, Olof Koeneman, Marika Lekakou & Margreet van der Hann (eds.), Microvariations in syntactic doubling, –. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9781848550216_018
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9781848550216_018 [Google Scholar]
  139. Tomlin, Russell S.
    1987 Linguistic reflections of cognitive events. InRussell S. Tomlin (ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.11.20tom
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.11.20tom [Google Scholar]
  140. Vonk, Wietske, Lettica G. M. M. Hustinx & Wim H. G. Simons
    1992 The use of referential expressions in structuring discourse. Language and Cognitive Processes(). –. 10.1080/01690969208409389
     https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969208409389 [Google Scholar]
  141. de Vries, Lourens
    2006 Areal pragmatics of New Guinea: Thematization, distribution and recapitulative linkage in Papuan narratives. Journal of Pragmatics. –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  142. Weissenrieder, Maureen
    1991 A functional approach to the accusative a. Hispania(). –. 10.2307/344574
     https://doi.org/10.2307/344574 [Google Scholar]
  143. Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena, Taras Zakharko, Lennart Bierkandt, Fernando Zúñiga & Balthasar Bickel
    2016 Decomposing hierarchical alignment: Co-arguments as conditions on alignment and the limits of referential hierarchies as explanations in verb agreement. Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/ling‑2016‑0011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2016-0011 [Google Scholar]
  144. Witzlack-Makarevich, Alena & Ilja Seržant
    2018 Differential argument marking: Patterns of variation. InIlja A. Seržant & Alena Witzlack-Makarevich (eds.), Diachrony of differential argument marking, –. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.1228242
     https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1228242 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
Loading
Differential argument marking and discourse prominence
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23060.pau
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: differential argument marking ; differential object indexing ; differential object marking ; differential agent marking ; discourse prominence

Most Cited

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