Introduction published In:
Differential objects and datives – a homogeneous class?Edited by Monica Alexandrina Irimia and Anna Pineda
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 42:1] 2019
► pp. 1–6
Edited by Monica Alexandrina Irimia and Anna Pineda
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 42:1] 2019
► pp. 1–6
Introduction
Differential objects and datives
A homogeneous class?
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
-
References
This article is available free of charge.
References (32)
Aissen, J. 2003. Differential object marking: iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(3), 435–483. 
Anand, P. & Nevins, A. 2006. The locus of ergative Case assignment: Evidence from scope. In A. Johns, D. Massam & J. Ndayiragije (Eds.), Ergativity: Emerging issues, 143–171. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Aoun, J. 1999. Clitic-doubled arguments. In K. Johnson & I. Roberts (Eds.), Beyond principles and parameters: Essays in memory of Osvaldo Jaeggli, 13–42. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Bárány, A. 2018.
dom and dative case. Glossa, 3 (1), 97.1–40.
Bhatt, R. & Anagnostopoulou, E. 1996. Object shift and specificity: evidence from ko-phrases in Hindi. In L. M. Dobrin, K. Singer & L. McNair (Eds.), Papers from the 32nd Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 11–22. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Bossong, G. 1991. Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In D. Kibbee & D. Wanner (Eds.), New analyses in Romance linguistics, 143–170. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
1998. Le marquage différentiel de l’object dans les langues de l’Europe. In J. Feuillet (Ed.), Actance et valence dans les langues d’Europe, 193–259. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Butt, M. 1993. Object specificity and agreement in Hindi-Urdu. In C. Beals et al. (Eds.), Papers from the 29th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 89–103. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Comrie, B. 1979. Definite and animate direct objects: a natural class. Linguistica Silesiana 31. (Katowice: University of Silesia), 13–21.
1981. Language universals and linguistic typology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Croft, W. 1988. Agreement vs. case marking and direct objects. In M. Barlow & C. A. Ferguson (Eds.), Agreement in natural language. Approaches, theories, description, 159–180. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
1990. Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fernández, B. & Rezac, M. 2016. Differential object marking in Basque varieties. In B. Fernández, J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), Microparameters in the grammar of Basque, 93–138. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Givón, T. 1984. Direct objects and dative shifting: Semantic and pragmatic case. In F. Plank (Ed.), Objects. Towards a theory of grammatical relations, 151–183. London: Academic Press.
Glushan, Z. 2010. Deriving Case syncretism in Differential Object marking systems. [URL]
Irimia, M. A. 2018. Differential objects and other structural objects. Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America, 3 (50), 1–15.
To appear. Differential objects and other structural objects. Some remarks on differential object marking in Romanian. Ms.
Jaeggli, O. 1982. Topics in Romance syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
Katz, D. 1987. Grammar of the Yiddish language. London: Duckworth.
Lazard, G. 2001. Le marquage différential de l’objet. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Österreicher & W. Raible (Eds.), Language typology and linguistic universals. An international handbook, vol 21, 873–885. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
López, L. 2012. Indefinite objects. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Manzini, M. R. & Franco, L. 2016. Goal and dom datives. Natural language and linguistic theory, 34(1), 197–240.
Mohanan, T. 1994. Argument structure in Hindi. Stanford, CA. CSLI Publications.
Moravcsik, E. A. 1978. On the case marking of objects. In J. H. Greenberg, C. A. Ferguson & E. A. Moravcsik (Eds.), Universals of human language. Syntax. Volume IV1, 249–289. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Odria, A. 2014. Differential object marking and the nature of dative case in Basque varieties. Linguistic variation, 14 (2), 289–314.
2017. Differential object marking and datives in Basque syntax. PhD thesis, University of the Basque Country.
Ormazabal, J. & Romero, J. 2007. The object agreement constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25 (2), 315–347.
2010. The derivation of dative alternations. In M. Duguine, S. Huidobro & N. Madariaga (Eds.), Argument Structure and Syntactic Relations from a Crosslinguistic Perspective, 203–232. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
2013. Differential Object Marking, Case and Agreement. Borealis. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 2 (2), 221–239.
Raz, S. 1980. Tigre syntax and Semitic Ethiopian. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African studies, 43 (2), 235–250.
Shain, C. A. 2008. Differential object marking in Paraguayan Guaraní. BA thesis. University of Columbus, Ohio.
de Swart, P. 2007. Cross-linguistic variation in object marking. Radbound: University of Nijmegen doctoral dissertation.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Irimia, Monica Alexandrina
2022. Chapter 4. Differential object marking, oblique morphology, and enriched case hierarchies. In Points of Convergence in Romance Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, 360], ► pp. 82 ff. 
Bárány, András
2021. Partially ordered case hierarchies. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6:1
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.