Cover not available
Part of
Differential Object Marking in Romance: Towards microvariation
Edited by Monica Alexandrina Irimia and Alexandru Mardale
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 280] 2023
► pp. 1–23

Introduction

| University of Modena and Regio Emilia
| INaLCO Paris & SeDyL UMR8202 CNRS
Article outline
  • 1.Romance DOM: Semantic and pragmatic factors
  • 2.Romance DOM: Specificity
  • 3.Romance DOM: Animacy
  • 4.Romance DOM: Morphological shape
  • 5.DOM and syntactic effects
    • 5.1DOM and displacement
    • 5.2DOM and co-occurrence restrictions
  • 6.DOM under contact
  • 7.Diachrony: Violations of the scales, reduction or enrichment of DOM
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 27 November 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.280.01iri
References
Aissen, J.
(2003) Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 21(3), 435–483. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Antonov, A., & Mardale, A.
(2014) From perlative to differential object marking. The curious case of the Romanian PE. Paper presented at the international workshop The Diachronic Typology of Differential Argument Marking, 5–6 April, University of Konstanz.
Avram, L.
(2004) Differential object marking in Romanian: The view from acquisition. Paper presented at AICED (= Annual International Conference of the English Department), University of Bucharest 16.
Avram, L., & Zafiu, R.
(2017) Semantic hierarchies in the evolution of differential object marking in Romanian. In A. Dragomirescu et al. (Ed.), Sintaxa ca mod de a fi. Omagiu Gabrielei Pană-Dindelegan, la aniversare (pp. 29–42). Bucureşti: Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
Baker, M.
(2015) Case. Its principles and parameters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bárány, A.
(2018) DOM and dative case. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 3(1), 97, 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bárány, András
(2021) Partially ordered case hierarchies. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6(1): 76. 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belletti, A.
(2018) On a-marking of object topics in the Italian left periphery. In R. Petrosino, P. C. Cerrone, & H. van der Hulst (Eds.), From sounds to structures (pp. 445–466). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benito, R.
(2016) Differential object marking in Catalan: Contexts of appearance and analysis (Unpublished MA thesis). Universitat de Barcelona.
forthcoming). Processament, coneixement i ús del Marcatge Diferencial d’Objecte en parlants monolingües i bilingües d’espanyol i català (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
Bossong, G.
(1985) Empirische Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
(1991) Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In D. Wanner & D. A. Kibbee (Eds.), New analyses in Romance linguistics. Selected papers from the XVIII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Urbana-Champaign, April 7–9, 1988 (pp. 43–171). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998) Le marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues d’Europe. In J. Feuillet (Ed.), Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe (pp. 258–293). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Company, C.
(2002) Grammaticalization and category weakness. In I. Wischer & G. Diewald (Eds.), New reflections on grammaticalization (pp. 201–215). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Comrie, B.
(1989) Language universals and linguistic typology. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Cornilescu, A.
(2000) On the interpretation of the prepositional accusative in Romanian. Bucharest Working Papers in Linguistics, 2(1), 91–110.Google Scholar
Cyrino, S., & Irimia, M. A.
(2019) Differential object marking in Brazilian Portuguese. Revista Letras UFPR, 99, 177–201.Google Scholar
Dobrovie-Sorin, C.
(1994) The syntax of Romanian. Comparative studies in Romance. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Escandell-Vidal, M. V.
(2009) Differential object marking and topicality. The case of Balearic Catalan. Studies in Language, 33(4), 832–885. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
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 (pp. 93–139). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fiorentino, G.
(Ed.) (2003) Romance objects. Transitivity in Romance languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
García García, M.
(2018) Nominal and verbal parameters in the diachrony of differential object marking in Spanish. In I. A. Seržant & A. Witzlack-Makarevich (Eds.), The diachronic typology of differential argument marking (pp. 207–239). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Heusinger, K. von, & Kaiser, G. A.
(2005) The evolution of differential object marking in Spanish. In Proceedings of the Workshop: Specificity and the Evolution / Emergence of Nominal Determination Systems in Romance (pp. 33–69). University of Konstanz.Google Scholar
Heusinger, K. von, & Onea, G. E.
(2008) Triggering and blocking effects in the development of DOM in Romanian. Probus, 20, 67–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hill, V., & Mardale, A.
(2021) The diachrony of differential object marking in Romanian. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iemmolo, G.
(2010) Topicality and differential object marking: Evidence from Romance and beyond. Studies in Language, 34(2), 239–272. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Irimia, M. A.
(2020a) Types of structural objects. Some remarks on differential object marking in Romanian. In A. Bárány & L. Kalin (Eds.), Case, agreement and their interactions. New perspectives on differential argument marking (pp. 77–126). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020b) Variation in differential object marking. On some differences between Spanish and Romanian. Open Linguistics, 2020(6), 424–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2021) When DOM is not dependent on the external argument. Proceedings of SICOGG, 23, 1–20.Google Scholar
(2022) DOM and nominal structure. Some notes on DOM with bare nominals. Languages, 7(175), 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2023) Oblique DOM in enriched case hierarchies. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics.8(1): 1–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiménez-Gaspar, A.
(2020) Bilingualism and language change: The production of the pronominal clitics and the differential object marking in Majorcan Catalan and Spanish (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universitat de les Illes Balears.
Jones, M. A.
(1995) The prepositional accusative in Sardinian: Its distribution and syntactic repercussions. In J. C. Smith & M. Maiden (Eds.), Linguistic theory and the Romance languages (pp. 37–75). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003) Sintassi della lingua sarda. Condaghes.Google Scholar
Kabatek, J., Obrist, P., & Wall, A.
(Eds.) (2021) Differential object marking in Romance. The third wave. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lazard, G.
(1994) L’actance. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Leonetti, M.
(2003) Specificity and differential object marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 3, 75–114. [URL] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Specificity in clitic doubling and in DOM. Probus, 20(1), 33–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
López, L.
(2012) Indefinite objects: Scrambling, choice functions and differential marking. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manzini, M. R., & Franco, L.
(2016) Goal and DOM datives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 34, 197–240. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mardale, A.
(2008) Notes on bare plurals and differential object marking in Romance. In Hommage à la professeure Ioana Vintilă-Rădulescu. Special issue of Studii şi Cercetări Lingvistice, LIX(2), 411–424.Google Scholar
(2010) Éléments d’analyse du marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues romanes. Faits de Langues. Les Cahiers, 2, 161–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Differential object marking in the first original Romanian texts. In V. Hill (Ed.), Formal approaches to DPs in Old Romanian (pp. 200–245). Brill.Google Scholar
(2017) Le marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues romanes: Quelques nouvelles pièces du puzzle. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, LXII(4), 351–359.Google Scholar
Mardale, A., & Karatsareas, P.
(Eds.) (2020) Differential object marking and language contact. Special issue of Journal of Language Contact, 13(1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niculescu, A.
(1965) Obiectul direct prepoziţional în limbile romanice. Individualitatea limbii române între limbile romanice. Bucureşti: Editura Ştiinţifică.Google Scholar
Odria, A.
(2014) Differential object marking and the nature of dative case in Basque varieties. Linguistic Variation, 14(2), 289–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017) Differential object marking and datives in Basque syntax (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). UPV/EHU.
(2019) Differential object marking in Basque and Spanish dialects. In A. Berro, B. Fernández, & J. Ortiz de Urbina (Eds.), Basque and Romance: Aligning grammars (pp. 243–275). Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ormazabal, J., & Romero, J.
(2007) The object agreement constraint. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 25(2), 315–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013a) Differential object marking, case and agreement. Borealis: An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics, 2(2), 221–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013b) Non accusative objects. Catalan Journal of Linguistics, 12, 155–173. [URL] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perpiñán, C.
(2018) On convergence, ongoing language change, and crosslinguistic influence in direct object expression in Catalan–Spanish bilingualism. Languages, 3(14), 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Puig-Mayenco, E., Cunnings, I., Bayram, F., Miller, D., Tubau, S., & Rothman, J.
(2018) Language dominance affects bilingual performance and processing outcomes in adulthood. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Puig-Mayenco, E., Miller, D., & Rothman, J.
(2017) Adult outcomes of early child second language (L2) acquisition: Differential object marking in the child L2 Spanish of Catalan natives. In M. LaMendola & J. Scott (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 546–558). Cascadilla PressGoogle Scholar
Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, M.
(2007) The syntax of objects. Agree and differential object marking (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Connecticut.
Rodríguez-Ordóñez, I.
(2016) DOM in Basque: Grammaticalization, attitudes and ideological representations (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
(2017) Reexamining differential object marking as a linguistic contact-phenomenon in Gernika Basque. Journal of Language Contact, 10, 318–352. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roegiest, E.
(1979) A propos de l’accusatif prépositionnel dans quelques langues romanes. Vox Romanica, 38, 312–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rohlfs, G.
(1971) Autour de l’accusatif prépositionnel dans les langues romanes: Concordances et discordances. Revue de Linguistique Romaine, 35, 312–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seržant, I. A., & Witzlack-Makarevich, A.
(Eds.) (2018) The diachronic typology of differential argument marking (pp. 207–239). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, M.
(1976) Hierarchy of features and ergativity. In R. M. W. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical categories in Australian languages. Grammatical Categories in Australian languages (pp. 112–171). Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Torrego, E.
(1998) The dependencies of objects. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar