Diachrony of Differential Object Marking

Country: France

City: Paris

Abstr. due: 01.06.2017

Dates: 16.11.17 — 17.11.17

Area Of Sciences: Humanities;

Organizing comittee e-mail: alexandru.mardale@inalco.fr, ilja.serzants@uni-leipzig.de

Organizers: INaLCO


This workshop addresses the differential marking of the object argument in the narrow sense, as defined in Witzlack-Makarevich & Seržant (2017+): “Any kind of situation where an argument of a predicate bearing the same generalized semantic role may be coded in different ways, depending on factors other than the argument role itself and/or the clausal properties of the predicate such as polarity, TAM, embeddedness, etc.”

The phenomenon of the Differential Object Marking (DOM) has been widely discussed in the literature after it was put forward by Bossong (1982, 1985). DOM is typically conditioned by factors pertaining to various grammatical dimensions such as animacy, definiteness/specificity, topicality, pats-of-speech distinctions (e.g. pronouns vs. nouns), etc. (cf. Aissen 2003, Bossong 1982, 1985, 1998, Croft 1998, Dalrymple & Nikolaeva 2011, Iemmolo 2011, Lazard 1994, 2011, Leonetti 2003, 2007, Næss 2004, de Hoop & de Swart 2007; cf. the overview in Witzlack-Makarevich & Seržant 2017+).

However, much less attention has been paid to the diachronic aspect of DOM in the literature, Dalrymple & Nikolaeva (2011) being an important exception here alongside with few case-studies on particular languages (such as Melis 1995 and von Heusinger & Kaiser 2005 on Spanish, Heusinger & Onea 2008, Mardale 2009, 2015, Hill 2013, Avram & Zafiu 2017 on Romanian, Iemmolo 2011 on Romance, Seržant & Taperte 2016 on Latvian, McGregor, to appear, on Khoe languages).

Conference Web-Site: http://linguistlist.org/callconf/browse-conf-action.cfm?ConfID=278596