Article

Name: Variable case marking of possessive nominal phrases in the direct object position in Tuvan

Authors: Ondar C. G.

Aldan Maadyr National Museum of the Republic of Tuva, Kyzyl, Russian Federation

In the section Linguistics

Abstract:

Considering the phenomenon of differential object marking of the direct object in possessive nominal phrases (NPs) has revealed two varieties of differential case marking in the Tuvan language: of the direct object and of the possessor. Thus, it was interesting to check the correlation between the factors influencing variation in both cases. The choice in favor of the genitive marking of the possessor is found to be determined by definiteness, animacy of the referent of some NPs, the linear remoteness of the possessive construction components, and additional definitions. Genitive marking of a possessor with an indefinite or non-referential status is due to the sentence information structure. The same set of factors is relevant for choosing accusative direct object labeling. Thus, the obligatory accusative marking of possessive NPs with a genitive possessor in the position of a direct object is associated with the same factors in the structure of relations between components that determined the choice of the genitive form of the possessor. Accusative marking of the direct object of possessive NPs without a genitive is determined by the definiteness of the possessor, the presence of identifying definitions, the presupposition of the singularity of the referent, the sentence information structure, with different communicative status of the object and the predicate. Possessive NPs without a genitive in the direct object position are used in the nominative: if their referent has an indefinite or non-referential status, they are in the utterance rheme with a contact arrangement to the control verb and have no other determinants.

Keywords: Tuvan language, differential object marking, variant case marking, nominative case, accusative case, genitive case, possessive nominal phrase

Bibliography:

Aissen J. Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs Economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 2003, iss. 21, pp. 435–483.

Baskakov N. A. Istoriko-tipologicheskaya morfologiya tyurkskikh yazykov: (Struktura slova i mekhanizmy agglyutinatsii) [Historical and typological morphology of the Turkic languages: (Word structure and agglutination mechanisms)]. Moscow, Nauka, 1979, 276 p.

Bossong G. Empirische Universalienforschung: differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen, Narr, 1985, 186 p.

Dalrymple M., Nikolaeva I. Objects and Information Structure. Cambridge, Cambridge Uni. Press, 2011, 247 p.

Dmitriev N. K. Grammatika kumykskogo yazyka [Grammar of the Kumyk language]. Moscow, Leningrad, Izd. AN SSSR, 1940, 206 p.

Grashhenkov P. V. Tyurkskaya imennaya gruppa: tysyacha i odna zagadka [Turkic noun phrase: a thousand and one riddles (manuscript)]. Moscow, 2002. URL: https:// pandia.ru/text/78/577/35930-3.php

Haspelmath M. Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery. 2005, no. 3.1, pp. 1–21.

Iskhakov F. G., Pal’mbakh A. A. Grammatika tuvinskogo yazyka: fonetika i morfologiya [Grammar of the Tuvan language: phonetics and morphology]. Moscow, Vost. lit., 1961, 472 p.

Johanson L. Bestimmtheit und Mitteilungsperspektive im türkischen Satz. Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenländischen Gesellschaft. Supplement. 1977, vol. III/2, pp. 1186‒1203.

Kazem-bek A. K. Grammatika turetsko-tatarskogo yazyka [Grammar of the Turkish-Tatar language]. Kazan’, 1846, 456 p.

Lyutikova E. A. Padezh i struktura imennoy gruppy: variativnoe markirovanie ob”ekta v misharskom dialekte tatarskogo yazyka [Case and noun phrase structure: Variable object marking in the Mishar dialect of the Tatar language]. Rhema. Rema. 2014, no.4, pp. 50‒770.

Mayzel’ S. S. Izafet v turetskom yazyke [Izafet in Turkish]. Moscow, Leningrad, Izd. AN SSSR, 1957, 187 p.

Murav’eva I. A. O traktovke neoformlennogo imeni v tyurkskikh yazykakh [On the interpretation of an unformed name in the Turkic languages]. In: Issledovaniya po teorii grammatiki [Studies in the theory of grammar]. Moscow, Gnozis, 2008, Iss. 4: Grammaticheskie kategorii v diskurse [Grammar categories in discourse], pp. 321‒420.

Muravyova I. A. Unmarked noun form in Turkic languages: a typological point of view. In: Altaic Religious Beliefs and Practices. Proceedings of the 33rd Meeting of the Permanent International Altaic Conference (Budapest, June 24–29, 1990). Budapest, Academic Press, 1992, pp. 257‒261.

Nilsson B. Definiteness and reference in relation to the Turkish accusative. Orientalia suecana. 1978, no. 27‒28, pp. 118‒131.

Ondar Ch. G. Differentsirovannoe markirovanie ob”ekta v izafetnykh konstruktsiyakh 1-go i 2-go litsa v tuvinskom yazyke [Differential object marking in 1st and 2nd-person Izafet constructions of the Tuvan language]. In: Aktual’nye problemy lingvistiki i literaturovedeniya: cbornik materialov 8 (22) Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii molodykh uchenykh (15–17 aprelya 2021 g.) [Actual problems of Linguistics and Literary studies. Proceedings of the 8 (22) International Scientific and Practical Conference of young scientists (April 15–17, 2021)]. Tomsk, TSU Publ., 2021a, iss. 22, pp. 7‒12. DOI 10.17223/978-5-907442-02-3-2021-2

Ondar Ch. G. Differentsirovannoe markirovanie ob”ekta v tuvinskom yazyke: zavisimost’ ot funktsii i kharaktera opredeleniya [Differential Object Marking in Tuvan language: dependence on the function and nature of the definition]. Languages and Folklore of Indigenous Peoples of Siberia. 2021b, no. 1 (iss. 41), pp. 154–162. DOI 10.25205/2312-6337-2021-1-154-162

Paducheva E. V. Vyskazyvanie i ego sootnesennost’ s deystvitel’nost’yu: referentsial’nye aspekty semantiki mestoimeniy [Statement and its correlation with reality: referential aspects of the semantics of pronouns]. 6th ed. Moscow, Izd. LKI, 2010, 296 p.

Swart P. J. F. de. Cross-linguistic variation in object marking. Utrecht, LOT, 2007.

Toldova S. Yu., Serdobol’skaya N. V. Namereniya govoryashchego i referentsial’nye svoystva imennykh grupp [Speaker’s purpose and the referential status of noun phrases]. In: Tr. Mezhdunar. seminara “Dialog 2002” po komp’yuternoy lingvistike [Proc. of the International seminar “Dialogue 2002” on computational linguistics]. Moscow, 2002, Vol. 1: Teoreticheskie problem [Theoretical problems].

Tybykova A. T. Bezaffiksal’naya forma imeni sushchestvitel`nogo v roli pryamogo dopolneniya v altayskom yazyke [Non-affixal form of direct object in the Altaic language]. In: Morfologiya tyurkskikh yazykov Sibiri [Morphology of the Turkic languages of Siberia]. Novosibirsk, 1985, pp. 75‒86.

Ubryatova E. I. Issledovaniya po sintaksisu yakutskogo yazyka [Research on the syntax of the Yakut language]. Novosibirsk, Nauka, 2006, 618 p.