Cover not available
Article published In:
Partitives cross-linguistically: Dimensions of variation
Edited by Silvia Luraghi and Petra Sleeman
[Linguistic Variation 23:1] 2023
► pp. 157–189

Partitive, genitive or nominative?

Estonian DOM in written use through centuries

ORCID logo | University of Tartu
| University of Tartu

The object has two variants in Estonian: partial object (in partitive, the functionally unmarked variant) and total object (in genitive or nominative). We examine the variation in object case in Estonian texts from the 17th to the 20th century, focusing on the 19th century and regarding this variation as an indicator in assessing the sociolinguistic variation of Estonian in texts. The texts of Old Literary Estonian were written by German scholars for whom Estonian was a collective interlanguage. In the 19th century the development of written Estonian came gradually into the hands of native speakers, who were surrounded by a predominantly German-language cultural space. In the Estonian of Germans the total object was overused. The 19th-century texts written by native Estonians represent an amalgam of native language and earlier interlanguage, they show fluctuations, and overuse of the partial object. By the turn of the 20th century, object case usage has stabilized.

Keywords: object, partitive, nominative, genitive, variation, written language, interlanguage, sociohistory, Estonian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Sociohistorical background
  • 3.The framework of interlanguage and amalgam language revealing the characteristics of older Estonian literary language
    • 3.1On the terms of interlanguage and amalgam language and their suitability for the description of older Estonian literary language
    • 3.2Some amalgam language features in 19th century written Estonian
  • 4.Research questions, hypotheses, data, and method
  • 5.Object cases in Estonian
    • 5.1Main features of differential object marking
    • 5.2Points of departure for the analysis of 19th-century object case usage
  • 6.Background: Object case usage in different time periods
    • 6.1Objects in present-day L1 Estonian texts
    • 6.2Objects in the Estonian of 21st century native German language learners
    • 6.3Objects in Estonian of German authors in the 17th-19th century
  • 7.Use of object cases in L1 texts through the 19th century
  • 8.Discussion: Objects in texts by Estonian L1 speakers in 19th century
  • 9.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 27 January 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.20016.met
References
Ahrens, Eduard
1853a Grammatik der Ehstnischen Sprache Revalschen Dialektes. Zweiter Theil: Satzlehre. Reval: Kluge und Ströhm.Google Scholar
1853b Sprachfehler der Ehstnischen Bibel. Gesammelt und den Predigern der Ehsten zu unbefangener Prüfung empfohlen von Eduard Ahrens. Reval: Kluge und Ströhm.Google Scholar
Argus, Reili
2004 Eesti keele käändesüsteemi omandamine: esimestest sõnadest miniparadigmadeni. [Acquisition of the Estonian case system: From first words to mini-paradigms.] Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat [The Year Book of the Estonian Mother Tongue Society] 491. Tallinn. 23–49.Google Scholar
2009 Acquisition of Estonian: some typologically relevant features. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 62(1/2). 91–108.Google Scholar
Barlow, Michael & Suzanne Kemmer
2000 Usage-based models of language. Stanford-California: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan
2010 Language, Usage, and Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehala, Martin
2011 Transfer, hybridization and analogy in L2 usage: the case of Estonian object marking. International Journal of Bilingualism 16(1). 159–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erelt, Tiiu & Heli Laanekask
2007 Written Estonian. In Mati Erelt (ed.), Estonian Language, 273–342. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers.Google Scholar
Habicht, Külli
2001 Eesti vanema kirjakeele leksikaalsest ja morfosüntaktilisest arengust ning Heinrich Stahli keele eripärast selle taustal. [The lexical and morphosyntactic development of Old Literary Estonian and the background for the peculiar features in the language of Heinrich Stahl]. (Dissertationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 10). Tartu.
Hennoste, Tiit
2020 Murdesüntaks [Dialect syntax]. In Karl Pajusalu, Tiit Hennoste, Ellen Niit, Peeter Päll & Jüri Viikberg (eds.). Eesti murded ja kohanimed [Estonian dialects and place names], 112–122. Tartu, Tallinn: EKSA.Google Scholar
Hint, Mati
2017 Partitiivi laienemine aspektituks objektikäändeks [Expansion of partitive case in the Estonian language into a counterpart of Indo-European accusative]. Mäetagused [Behind the Mountain] 691. 153–179. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hobsbawm, Eric J.
1990 Nations and nationalism since 1780: Programme, myth, reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hroch, Miroslav
2000 Social preconditions of national revival in Europe: a comparative analysis of the social composition of patriotic groups among the smaller European nations. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kont, Karl
1963 Käändsõnaline objekt läänemeresoome keeltes [A nominal object in the Finnic languages]. Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituudi Uurimused [Studies of the Institute of Estonian Language and Literature] IX1. Tallinn.Google Scholar
Larjavaara, Matti
1991 Aspektuaalisen objektin synty. Virittäjä, 95(4). 372–404.Google Scholar
2019 Partitiivin valinta. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.Google Scholar
Lees, Aet
2015 Case alternation in five Finnic languages. Estonian, Finnish, Karelian, Livonian and Veps. (Brill’s Studies in Language, Cognition, and Culture 13.) Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Makoni, Sinfree & Alastair Pennycook
2007 Disinventing and Reconstituting Languages. In Sinfree Makoni & Alastair Pennycook (eds.), Disinventing and reconstituting languages. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 1–41. Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters LTD.Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle
2001 On the developments of the Estonian aspect: the verbal particle ära . In Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), Circum-Baltic languages: Grammar and typology. Vol. 21. (Studies in Language Companion Series 55.), 443–479. Amsterdam, Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009 The pitfalls of a language: Estonian as L2. In Bilinguisme et traduction. Des enjeux pour l’Europe. Sous la direction de M. M. Jocelyne Fernandez-Vest et Danh Thành Do-Hurinville. (Grammaire & Cognition 6.), 119–134. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
2017 Sihitis [Object]. Mati Erelt & Helle Metslang (eds.). Eesti keele süntaks [Syntax of the Estonian language]. (Eesti keele varamu [Estonian repository] III1), 258–277. Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
Metslang, Helle & Külli Habicht
2019a XIX sajandi eesti kirjakeel – vahekeelest sulandkeeleks [19th century written Estonian – from interlanguage to amalgam]. Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat [The Year Book of the Estonian Mother Tongue Society] 641, 111–140. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019b Revolutionary and mysterious: written Estonian through the 19th century. (Poster presented at the 52nd annual meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea, Leipzig, 21st – 24th August 2019.)
Nordlund, Taru
2007 Double diglossia – lower class writing in 19th century Finland. Multilingua 261. 229–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ogren, David
2015 Differential object marking in Estonian: Prototypes, variation, and construction-specificity. SKY Journal of Linguistics 281. 277–312.Google Scholar
2017 Aspect and irregular object case variation in Estonian da-infinitive constructions. Finno-Ugric Languages and Linguistics 6(2). 80–105.Google Scholar
2018 Object case variation in Estonian da-infinitive constructions. (Disseratationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 41.) Tartu: University of Tartu Press.
Piri, Olli-Juhani
2017 Morfosyntaktiset objektivirheet oppijansuomessa. Korpuspohjainen kuvaus suomenoppijoiden kielitaidon tarkkuuden kehityksestä. Oulun yliopisto. (MA thesis.)
Pool, Raili
2007 Eesti keele teise keelena omandamise seaduspärasusi täis- ja osasihitise näitel [The acquisition of total and partial objects by learners of Estonian as a second language]. (Dissertationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 19.) Tartu: Tartu University.
Prillop, Külli & Eva Saar
2020 Eesti keele ajalooline morfoloogia [Historical morphology of the Estonian language]. In Külli Prillop, Karl Pajusalu, Eva Saar, Sven-Erik Soosaar & Tiit-Rein Viitso. Eesti keele ajalugu [History of the Estonian language]. (Eesti keele varamu [Estonian repository] VI), 169–336. Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar
Raag, Raimo
2008 Talurahva keelest riigikeeleks [From peasant language to the national language]. Tartu: Atlex.Google Scholar
Raun, Toivo U.
2001 Estonia and the Estonians. Updated 2nd ed. Stanford, CA: Hoover Institution Press.Google Scholar
2003 Nineteenth- and early twentieth century Estonian nationalism revisited. Nations and Nationalism 9(1). 129–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rätsep, Huno
1982 Eesti keele ajalooline morfoloogia I. [Historical morphology of the Estonian language]. Tartu.Google Scholar
Rutten, Gijsbert
2016 Diaglossia, individual variation and the limits of standardization: Evidence from Dutch. In Cinzia Russi (ed.), Current Trends in Historical Sociolinguistics, 194–218. De Gruyter Open. [URL] (2 May 2021.) DOI logo
Selinker, Larry
1972 Interlanguage. International Review of Applied Linguistics 101. 209–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1992 Rediscovering Interlanguage. A Pearson Education Print on Demand Edition. London, New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Tamm, Anne
2006 Estonian transitive verbs and object case. In Miriam Butt & Tracy Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG06 Conference. Universität Konstanz. (CSLI Publications.) [URL] (10 May 2021)
2007 Perfectivity, telicity and Estonian verbs. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 30(2). 229–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Cross-categorial scalar properties explaining Differential Object Marking. Linguistics 52(2). 469–511. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tamm, Anne & Natalia Vaiss
2019 Setting the boundaries: Partitive verbs in Estonian verb classifications. In Margit Langemets, Maria-Maren Linkgreim, Helle Metslang & David Ogren (eds.), Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat [Estonian Papers in Applied Linguistics] 151. 159–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tarone, Elaine
2006 Interlanguage. In Keith Brown (ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics, 747–751. Boston: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Sarah
2001 Language contact. An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Vaiss, Natalia
2020 Kogesin vapustust või vapustuse? Sihilised verbid valikute ees [Estonian transitive verbs facing choices]. In Margit Langemets, Maria-Maren Linkgreim, Helle Metslang & David Ogren (eds.), Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat [Estonian Papers in Applied Linguistics] 161. 241–261. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Viht, Annika & Külli Habicht
2019 Eesti keele sõnamuutmine [Word inflection of the Estonian language]. (Eesti keele varamu [Estonian Treasory] IV), Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.Google Scholar
Viitso, Tiit-Rein
2007 Phonology, morphology and word-formation. In Mati Erelt (ed.), Estonian language, 9–92. Tallinn: Estonian Academy Publishers.Google Scholar
Viks, Ülle
1984 Sõnavormide homonüümia eesti keeles [Homonymy of word forms in Estonian]. Keel ja Kirjandus [Language and Literature] 7(2). 97–105.Google Scholar
Wiedemann, Ferdinand Johann
1875 Grammatik der Ehstnischen Sprache, zunächst wie sie in Mittelehstland gesprochen wird, mit Berücksichtigung der anderen Dialekte. St. Pétersbourg.Google Scholar