On the non-canonical double nominative construction in Japanese
The particle ga as an object marker
Japanese has two types of double nominative constructions — the first exemplified by sentences such as Taroo ga otoosan ga sinda “Taro — (his) father has died,” and the second by sentences such as Taroo ga eigo ga yoku dekiru “Taro can (speak) English well.” Kuno (1973a, b) claimed that the first is a double-subject construction, while the second is a subject–object construction. This analysis has recently been challenged by Shibatani (2001a, b, c), who claims that these double-nominative constructions are both double-subject constructions. This paper presents arguments against Shibatani’s double-subject analysis, and in support of the “Ga for Object Marking” analysis for the second construction.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Ogihara, Saeko
2016.
Japanese Learners’ Use of Zero - case Marking.
Journal of the society of Japanese Language and Literature, Japanology null:73
► pp. 95 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
UENO, MIEKO & MARIA POLINSKY
2009.
Does headedness affect processing? A new look at the VO–OV contrast.
Journal of Linguistics 45:3
► pp. 675 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 18 july 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.