Byproducts and side effects = Nebenprodukte und Nebeneffekte

Abstract

The papers collected in this volume have very diverse topics – such as prosodic peculiarities (Meinunger and Hamlaoui & Roussarie), morphological items (McFadden and Steriopolo), or phenomena concerning syntax and its interfaces, such as syntax-morphology (Kamali), syntax-parsing (Winkler), or syntax-pragmatics (Bittner & Dery). The languages considered range from quite prominent German and French via Turkish to very exotic Nuuchahnulth or no longer spoken Old and Middle English. However, all contributions center around structural phenomena and provide analyses in terms of grammatical theory.

Differential Object Marking and Other Object Licensing Strategies

“…Therefore, non-TI unmarked nominals do contain an abstract Case feature, with structural nature. A similar conclusion has, in fact, been argued for by Öztürk (2010) or Kamali (2015) for Turkish. But then, what distinguishes non-TI unmarked nominals from DOM?…”

“…DOM has been extensively studied for Turkic languages, starting from Turkish (Kornfilt 1984, Enç 1991, von Heusinger and Kornfilt 2005, Öztürk 2005, Baker and Vinokurova 2010, Kamali 2015. Most accounts (see the recent review in Jenkins 2021) derive object splits along these lines: unmarked objects must be caseless and, moreover, undergo complex predicate formation with V, blocking any intervening material, as in (8a); marked objects, on the other hand, have syntactic flexibility which is due to their containing a definiteness/specificity feature which is associated with structural Case.…”

“…We can take as a starting point the analysis Kamali (2015) has proposed for similar object splits in Turkish. Working in de Hoop's (1996) framework, Kamali assumes that both differentially marked and non-TI unmarked nominals contain a structural Case feature.…”

“…Under an implementation in this line, it is assumed that the obligatory licensing need on special objects forces them to enter the Dependent Case calculus with higher nominals in the clause (e.g., the subject), a process resulting in their overt morphology (building on Baker and Vinokurova 2010, Levin and Preminger 2015, Baker 2015, Irimia 2022. A third prominent approach takes marked objects to encode, following de Hoop's (1996) terminology, strong structural case; unmarked nominals are either restricted to inherent case or at most weak structural case (see for example Rodríguez-Mondoñedo 2007, Kamali 2015.…”