Motivations for differentiated marking of direct object in Tuvan language
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25178/nit.2022.2.10Keywords:
Tuvan language; differentiated marking of the object; accusative case; nominative case; prototypicality; animatedness; definitenessAbstract
The study examines the phenomenon of differentiated marking of a direct object, known in many languages of the world. The rules for choosing one or another case form of a direct object in different languages are heterogeneous and are determined by semantic, syntactic and pragmatic factors. The direct object in Tuvan can take the form of an indefinite, accusative, or ablative case. It is generally accepted that the main parameter determining the choice a case form is the category of certainty / uncertainty. However, typological works written in recent decades show that the variable marking of a direct object can be a complex and multifactor phenomenon in a number of languages. In each language, it takes an in-depth description. This study, focusing on Tuvan language, traces the direct object through two relevant factors of animatedness and definiteness.
The study makes use of 3200 sentences with 4780 direct objects in the Tuvan language taken from stylistically heterogeneous texts. The author relied on descriptive and statistical methods for the study.
The article shows that the phenomenon of differentiated marking of the direct object in the Tuvan language is motivated by two main functions of the case as a category: differentiation and identification. In essence, differentiation as a function means that case marking serves to express the opposition between the two main actants of the transitional sentence, taking into account their prototypical features. The role of animatedness as a factor in the phenomenon of differentiated marking of the direct object in Tuvan can be explained through its relation to the strategy of differentiation. The identification function of case marking is associated with semantic and pragmatic information about the noun phrase. The accusative indicator of the direct object, implementing the identification strategy, serves to indicate certainty, while the nominative form aims to indicate the indefiniteness or non-referentiality of the noun phrase.
References
Arutiunova, N. D. (1976) Predlozhenie i ego smysl: Logiko-semanticheskie problemy [Sentence and its meaning: Logical and semantic problems]. Moscow, Nauka. 383 p. (In Russ.).
Boldyrev, N. N. (2002) Invarianty i prototipy v sistemnoi i funktsional'noi kategorizatsii angliiskogo glagola [Invariants and prototypes in the system and functional categorization of the English verb]. In: Problemy funktsional'noi grammatiki. Semanticheskaia invariantnost' / variativnost' [Problems of functional grammar. Semantic invariance] / ed. by A. V. Bondarko et al. St. Petersburg, Nauka. 366 p. Pp. 57–74. (In Russ.).
Bondarko, A. V. (2000) Poniatiia «invariant» i «prototip» v sisteme analiza grammaticheskoi semantiki [The concepts of “invariant” and “prototype” in the system of grammatical semantics analysis]. In: Kognitivnaia semantika [Cognitive Semantics]: Materials of the Second International Cognitive Linguistics Seminar (September 11–14, 2000): in 2 parts / ed. by N. N. Boldyrev. Tambov, Tambov State University Publishing House. Part 2. 261 p. Pp. 166–169. (In Russ.).
Bondarko, A. V. (1992) Sub’ektno-predikatno-ob’ektnye situatsii [Subject-predicate-object situations]. In: Teoriia funktsional'noi grammatiki. Sub’ektnost'. Ob’ektnost'. Kommunikativnaia perspektiva vyskazyvaniia. Opredelennost'/ neopredelennost' [Theory of functional grammar. Subjectness. Objectness. The communicative perspective of the utterance. Certainty / uncertainty] / ed. by A. V. Bondarko. St. Petersburg, Nauka. 304 p. Pp. 29–70. (In Russ.).
Wittgenstein, L. (1994) Filosofskie raboty [Philosophical works]. Part I / transl. from Germ. by M. S. Kozlovoi and Yu. A. Aseeva; comp. by M. S. Kozlova. Moscow, Gnozis. 612 p. (In Russ.).
Gadzhiakhmedov, N. E. (2000) Slovoizmenitel'nye kategorii imeni i glagola v kumykskom iazyke (sravnitel'no s drugimi tiurkskimi iazykami) [Inflectional categories of the name and verb in the Kumyk language as compared with other Turkic languages]. Makhachkala, Yupiter. 382 p. (In Russ.).
Grigorian, E. L. (2014) Semanticheskaia kategoriia patsientivnosti (affectedness) i ee sintaksicheskie realizatsii [The semantic category of affectedness and its syntactic implementations]. Vestnik Baltiiskogo federal'nogo universiteta im. I. Kanta, issue 2, pp. 28–35. (In Russ.).
Dmitriev, N. K. (1960) Turetskii iazyk [Turkish language]. Moscow, Izdatel'stvo vostochnoi literatury. 95 p. (In Russ.).
Iskhakov, Ph. G. and Pal’mbakh, A. A. (1961) Grammatika tuvinskogo iazyka. Fonetika i morfologiia [A grammar of the Tuvan language. Phonetics and morphology]. Moscow, Vostochnaia literature Publ. 472 p. (In Russ.).
Kazem-bek, A. K. (1846) Grammatika turetsko-tatarskogo iazyka [A grammar of the Turkish-Tatar language]. Kazan', Tipografiia Kazanskogo universiteta. 2nd ed. 497 p. (In Russ.).
Lakoff, Dzh. (1988) Myshlenie v zerkale klassifikatorov [Thinking in the Mirror of Classifiers]. In: Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike [New developments in foreign linguistics] / ed. by V. V. Petrov and V. I. Gerasimov. Issue XXIII: Kognitivnye aspekty iazyka. Moscow, Progress. 318 p. Pp. 12–51. (In Russ.).
Liutikova, E. A. (2014) Padezh i struktura imennoi gruppy: variativnoe markirovanie ob’ekta v misharskom dialekte tatarskogo iazyka [Case and structure of the nominal group: variable marking of an object in the Mishar dialect of the Tatar language]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo gumanitarnogo universiteta im. M. A. Sholokhova. Filologicheskie nauki, no. 4, pp. 50–70. (In Russ.).
Maizel', S. S. (1957) Izafet v turetskom iazyke [Izafet in Turkish]. Moscow, Leningrad, Publishing House of the USSR Academy of Sciences. 187 p. (In Russ.).
Murav'eva, I. A. (2008) O traktovke neoformlennogo imeni v tiurkskikh iazykakh [On the interpretation of an unformulated name in the Turkic languages]. In: Issledovaniia po teorii grammatiki. Vyp. 4: Grammaticheskie kategorii v diskurse [Research on the theory of grammar. Issue 4: Grammatical categories in discourse] / ed. by V. A. Plungian. Moscow, Gnozis. 487 p. Pp. 321–420. (In Russ.).
Ondar, Ch. G. (2021) Kategoriia odushevlennosti i differentsirovannoe markirovanie ob"ekta v tuvinskom iazyke [The category of animateness and differentiated marking of an object in the Tuvan language]. In: Universal'noe i spetsifichnoe v verbal'nykh traditsiiakh narodov sovremennoi Rossii [Universal and specific in the verbal traditions of the peoples of modern Russia]: Abstracts of the All-Russian Research Conference with international participation "Languages of the peoples of Siberia and adjacent regions: Universal and specific in the verbal traditions of the peoples of modern Russia” / ed. by E. V. Tiuntesheva. Novosibirsk, Akademizdat. 168 p. Pp. 107–110. (In Russ.).
Paducheva, E. V. (2010) Vyskazyvanie i ego sootnesennost' s deistvitel'nost'iu: referentsial'nye aspekty semantiki mestoimenii [Utterance and its correlation with reality: referential aspects of pronoun semantics] / ed. by V. A. Uspenskii. 6nd ed. Moscow, LKI Publ. 296 p. (In Russ.).
Sat, Sh. Ch. (1993) Söster dugaiynda kyska demdeglelder [Brief notes on words]. In: Tyva dyl bolgash chugaa kul'turazy [Tuvan language and speech culture] / ed. by K. A. Bicheldei. Kyzyl, Tuvan Book Publishing House. 103 p. Pp. 7–18. (In Tuv).
Serdobol'skaia, N. V. (2019) Odushevlennost' i markirovanie priamogo dopolneniia v bessermianskom korpuse [Animacy and direct object marking in the Beserman corpus]. Yearbook of Finno-Ugric Studies, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 205–215. (In Russ.). DOI: https://doi.org/10.35634/2224-9443-2019-13-2-205-215
Serdobol'skaia, N. V. and Toldova, S. Yu. (2012) Differentsirovannoe markirovanie priamogo dopolneniia v finno-ugorskikh iazykakh [Differentiated marking of direct complement in Finno-Ugric languages]. In: Finno-ugorskie iazyki: fragmenty grammaticheskogo opisaniia. Formal'nyi i funktsional'nyi podkhody [Finno-Ugric languages: fragments of grammatical description. Formal and functional approaches] / ed. by A. Kuznetsova. Moscow, Studia Phililogica. 880 p. Pp. 59–142. (In Russ.).
Sereedar, N. Ch. (2009) Znacheniia priamogo ob"ekta v modeli deistviia v tuvinskom iazyke [The meaning of a direct object in the model of action in Tuvan]. New Research of Tuva, no. 4, pp. 189–202. (In Russ.).
Tybykova, A. T. (1985) Bezaffiksal'naia forma imeni sushchestvitel'nogo v roli priamogo dopolneniia v altaiskom iazyke [The suffixless form of the noun as a direct complement in the Altai language]. In: Morfologiia tiurkskikh iazykov Sibiri [Morphology of the Turkic languages of Siberia] / ed. by M. I. Cheremisina. Novosibirsk, Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy SB RAS. 155 p. Pp. 75–86. (In Russ.).
Ubriatova, E. I. (2006) Issledovaniia po sintaksisu iakutskogo iazyka [Research on the syntax of the Yakut language]. Novosibirsk, Nauka. 618 p. (In Russ.).
Fillmor, Ch. (1981) Delo o padezhe [The case of the case]. In: Novoe v zarubezhnoi lingvistike [New in foreign linguistics] / ed. by V. A. Zvegintsev. Moscow, Progress. Issue X. Pp. 369–495. (In Russ.).
Cheremisina, M. I., Ozonova, A. A. and Tazranova, A. R. (2008) Elementarnoe prostoe predlozhenie s glagol'nym skazuemym v tiurkskikh iazykakh Iuzhnoi Sibiri [An elementary simple sentence with a verb predicate in the Turkic languages of Southern Siberia] / ed. by E. K. Skribnik. Novosibirsk, Liubava. 205 p. (In Russ.).
Ackerman, F. and Moore J. (2001) Proto-properties and Grammatical Encoding: A Correspondence Theory of Argument Selection. Stanford, CSLI Publications. 197 p.
Aissen, J. (2003) Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs. Economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, vol. 21, pp. 435–483.
Bossong, G. (1985) Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den Neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen, Günter Narr Verlag. 187 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4697660
Comrie, B. (1989) Language universals and linguistic typology. 2nd ed. Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 264 p.
Dalrymple, M. andNikolaeva, I. (2011) Objects and Information Structure. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 247 p.
de Hoop, H. and Malchukov, A. L. (2008) Case-Marking Strategies. Linguistic Inquiry, vol. 39, issue 4, pp. 565–587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2008.39.4.565
de Swart, P. J. F. (2007) Cross-linguistic variation in object marking. Utrecht, LOT. 234 p.
Dixon, R. (1994) Ergativity. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 271 p.
Dowty, D. R. (1991) Thematic Proto Roles and Argument Selection. Language, vol. 67, no. 3, pp. 547–619.
Givón, T. (1983) Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins. 492 p.
Johanson, L. (1977) Bestimmtheit und Mitteilungsperspective im türkischen Satz. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft. Supplement III, 2. XIX. Deutscher Orientalistentag. Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz. 1847 p. Pp. 1186–1203.
Kibrik, A. E. (1985) Toward a typology of ergativity. In: Grammar inside and outside the clause: Some Approaches to Theory from the Field / ed. by J. Nichols and A. C. Woodbury. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 432 p. Pp. 268–323.
Klaiman, M. H. (1988) Affectedness and control: a typology of voice systems. In: Typological studies in language / ed. by M. Shibatani. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Publishing Company. Vol. 16. 706 p. P. 25–84.
Mallinson, G. and Blake B. (1981) Language Typology: Cross-cultural studies in syntax. Amsterdam, North-Holland Publishing Company. 486 p.
Moravcsik, E. (1978) On the Case Marking of Objects. Universals of human language, vol. 4: Syntax. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 667 p. P. 249–289.
Nilsson, B. (1978) Definiteness and reference in relation to the Turkish accusative. Orientalia suecana, vol. 27–28, pp. 118–131.
Øvrelid, L. (2004) Disambiguation of grammatical functions in Norwegian: Modeling variation in word order interpretations conditioned by animacy and definiteness. In: Proceedings of the 20th Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics / Ed. by Karlsson F. Helsinki, University of Helsinki. 290 p. P. 1–17.
Primus, B. (2007) Animacy, generalized semantic roles, and differential object marking. In: Case, word order, and prominence. Interacting Cues in Language Production and Comprehension. Lamers, M. and de Swart P. (eds.). Dordrecht, Springer. 348 p. Pp. 65–90.
Rosch, E., Mervis, S.B., Gray, W., Johnson, D. and Boyes-Braem P. (1976) Basic Objects in Natural Categories. Cognitive Psychology, no. 8, issue 3, pp. 382–436.
Rosch, E. and Mervis, C.B. (1975) Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories. Cognitive Psychology, no. 7, pp. 573–605.
Silverstein, M. (1976) Hierarchy of features and ergativity. Dixon R. M. W. (ed.) Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Canberra, Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies. 776 p. Pp. 112–171.
Yarar, E. (2018) Differential case marking in Turkish wh-object phrases. In: SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics / ed. by M. Weidl, S. Goodchild. Vol. 19. London, University of London. 154 p. Pp. 29–46.
Published
How to Cite
For citation:
Ondar Ch. G. Motivatsii differentsirovannogo markirovaniia priamogo ob»ekta v tuvinskom iazyke [Motivations for differentiated marking of direct object in Tuvan language]. New Research of Tuva, 2022, no. 2, pp. 143-165. DOI: https://www.doi.org/10.25178/nit.2022.2.10
Issue
Section
Author Biography
Choigan G. Ondar, Aldan Maadyr National Museum, Republic of Tuva; Institute of Philology, Siberian branch, Russian Academy of Sciences
Academic Secretary, Aldan Maadyr National Museum of the Republic of Tuva;
Candidate of Philology Student, Institute of Philology, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Postal address: 30 Titov St., 667000 Kyzyl; 8 Nikolaev St., 630090 Novosibirsk, Russian Federation.
Tel.: +7 (394) 222-28-00; +7 (383) 330-15-18.
Email: choygandi@mail.ru.
Research Supervisor: Doctor of Philology N. B. Koshkaryova.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Author(s) license holder(s) grant rights for their work to the journal (grantee of a license) under the simple non-exclusive open license in accordance with Art. 1286.1 «Open license for a research work, work of literature or fine arts», Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
New Research of Tuva publishes articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial license (CC BY-NC).
Since it is an open license, author(s) reserve the right to upload the article to their institutional repository, submit it to another journal (if it allows republications), or republish it on their own website (in full, or in part).
However, several conditions apply here:
a) The republished version must always contain the name(s) and affiliation(s) of the author(s), the original title and the hyperlink to the original version on the New Research of Tuva website;
b) It must be in open access, free of charge, and no category of readers must be in any way whatsoever advantaged over general readership.
c) should the contribution be submitted elsewhere by its author(s) without substantial modification (30% or more of original text unchanged), the body of the article should contain a disclaimer that the original version was published in New Research of Tuva (with a link to the respective page)
The CC-BY-NC is a non-revocable license which applies worldwide and lasts for the duration of the work’s copyright.
