Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian
This paper focuses on object experiencer (OE) causatives in Romanian, identifying a less discussed pattern of variation. The results of a pilot study indicate that for a class of speakers such predicates are not grammatical with an indefinite object, if the latter is not differentially marked. A sec...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Croatian |
| Published: |
Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Rasprave Instituta za Hrvatski Jezik i Jezikoslovlje |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/407456 |
| _version_ | 1797206684018409472 |
|---|---|
| author | Julie Goncharov Monica Alexandrina Irimia |
| author_facet | Julie Goncharov Monica Alexandrina Irimia |
| author_sort | Julie Goncharov |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper focuses on object experiencer (OE) causatives in Romanian, identifying a less discussed pattern of variation. The results of a pilot study indicate that for a class of speakers such predicates are not grammatical with an indefinite object, if the latter is not differentially marked. A second class of speakers can accept unmarked objects but only if access to direct evidence of the event is available. As these restrictions set aside OE causatives from physical causatives, a non-trivial question refers to the nature of this difference. An analysis is proposed that revolves around a pragmatic distinction between OE verbs and physical causatives. More precisely, insights put forward by pragmatic investigations of OE verbs have consolidated the observation, which we follow here, that these types of predicates presuppose a perception event in which the object of the asserted event is a perceiver. We further propose that the perception presupposition can be established in the context either by differential object marking (DOM), which has an independently motivated sentience feature, or by direct evidence. Subsequently, we also show that an analysis along these lines gives better results when addressing these types of splits against more general interactions between causatives, inanimate subjects and DOM; under previous accounts, the facts under discussion are either unpredicted or not straightforward to derive. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T09:10:55Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-d888a7745222497eaf530543a1f397a1 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1331-6745 1849-0379 |
| language | Croatian |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T09:10:55Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Institut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovlje |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Rasprave Instituta za Hrvatski Jezik i Jezikoslovlje |
| spelling | doaj.art-d888a7745222497eaf530543a1f397a12024-04-15T17:53:57ZhrvInstitut za hrvatski jezik i jezikoslovljeRasprave Instituta za Hrvatski Jezik i Jezikoslovlje1331-67451849-03792022-01-0148130532610.31724/rihjj.48.1.14Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in RomanianJulie Goncharov0Monica Alexandrina Irimia1Georg-August University of GöttingenUniversity of Modena and Reggio EmiliaThis paper focuses on object experiencer (OE) causatives in Romanian, identifying a less discussed pattern of variation. The results of a pilot study indicate that for a class of speakers such predicates are not grammatical with an indefinite object, if the latter is not differentially marked. A second class of speakers can accept unmarked objects but only if access to direct evidence of the event is available. As these restrictions set aside OE causatives from physical causatives, a non-trivial question refers to the nature of this difference. An analysis is proposed that revolves around a pragmatic distinction between OE verbs and physical causatives. More precisely, insights put forward by pragmatic investigations of OE verbs have consolidated the observation, which we follow here, that these types of predicates presuppose a perception event in which the object of the asserted event is a perceiver. We further propose that the perception presupposition can be established in the context either by differential object marking (DOM), which has an independently motivated sentience feature, or by direct evidence. Subsequently, we also show that an analysis along these lines gives better results when addressing these types of splits against more general interactions between causatives, inanimate subjects and DOM; under previous accounts, the facts under discussion are either unpredicted or not straightforward to derive.https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/407456differential object markingexperiencercausativesentienceevidentialityRomanian |
| spellingShingle | Julie Goncharov Monica Alexandrina Irimia Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian Rasprave Instituta za Hrvatski Jezik i Jezikoslovlje differential object marking experiencer causative sentience evidentiality Romanian |
| title | Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian |
| title_full | Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian |
| title_fullStr | Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian |
| title_full_unstemmed | Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian |
| title_short | Some Notes on Experiencer Causatives and <i>DOM</i> in Romanian |
| title_sort | some notes on experiencer causatives and i dom i in romanian |
| topic | differential object marking experiencer causative sentience evidentiality Romanian |
| url | https://hrcak.srce.hr/file/407456 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT juliegoncharov somenotesonexperiencercausativesandidomiinromanian AT monicaalexandrinairimia somenotesonexperiencercausativesandidomiinromanian |