Differential object marking
Encyclopedia
Differential object marking (DOM) is a linguistic phenomenon that is present in more than 300 languages; the term was coined by Georg Bossong
. In languages where DOM is active, direct objects are divided in two different classes, depending on different meanings, and, in most DOM languages, only one of the classes receives a marker, the other being unmarked (but there are languages, like Finnish
, where both types of objects are marked with different endings).
. In Spanish, direct objects that are both human and specific require a special marker (the preposition a "to"):
Inanimate direct objects do not usually allow this marker, even if they are specific:
Yet, some animate objects that are specific can optionally bear the marker:
, Copala Triqui, Khasi
and Amharic
. In Turkish, the direct object can either have accusative case or have no (visible) case at all; when it has accusative case, it is interpreted as specific (e.g. one specific person), and otherwise it is interpreted as nonspecific (e.g. some person).
This is different from what happens in non-DOM languages, where all direct objects are uniformly marked in the same way; for instance, a language could mark all direct objects with an accusative ending (as in Latin
); other language could leave all direct objects without overt marker (as in English
).
Bossong
Bossong is a surname common to Rhineland-Palatinate in Germany and Alsace in France.- Surname history :The Bossong family is of Frankish origin. This is neither Teutonic nor French, but a separate race, almost extinct today...
. In languages where DOM is active, direct objects are divided in two different classes, depending on different meanings, and, in most DOM languages, only one of the classes receives a marker, the other being unmarked (but there are languages, like Finnish
Finnish language
Finnish is the language spoken by the majority of the population in Finland Primarily for use by restaurant menus and by ethnic Finns outside Finland. It is one of the two official languages of Finland and an official minority language in Sweden. In Sweden, both standard Finnish and Meänkieli, a...
, where both types of objects are marked with different endings).
Spanish
A well-known DOM language is SpanishSpanish language
Spanish , also known as Castilian , is a Romance language in the Ibero-Romance group that evolved from several languages and dialects in central-northern Iberia around the 9th century and gradually spread with the expansion of the Kingdom of Castile into central and southern Iberia during the...
. In Spanish, direct objects that are both human and specific require a special marker (the preposition a "to"):
- Pedro besó a Lucía. = Peter kissed Lucy. (Literally, "Peter kissed to Lucy")
Inanimate direct objects do not usually allow this marker, even if they are specific:
- Pedro besó el retrato. = Peter kissed the picture.
Yet, some animate objects that are specific can optionally bear the marker:
- Pedro vio (a) la gata. = Peter saw (to) the cat-FEM
Other languages
Other examples of languages with differential object marking are TurkishTurkish language
Turkish is a language spoken as a native language by over 83 million people worldwide, making it the most commonly spoken of the Turkic languages. Its speakers are located predominantly in Turkey and Northern Cyprus with smaller groups in Iraq, Greece, Bulgaria, the Republic of Macedonia, Kosovo,...
, Copala Triqui, Khasi
Khasi language
Khasi is an Austro-Asiatic language spoken primarily in Meghalaya state in India by the Khasi people. Khasi is part of the Austroasiatic family of languages, and is fairly closely related to the Munda branch of that family, which is spoken in east&endash;central India.Although most of the 865,000...
and Amharic
Amharic language
Amharic is a Semitic language spoken in Ethiopia. It is the second most-spoken Semitic language in the world, after Arabic, and the official working language of the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. Thus, it has official status and is used nationwide. Amharic is also the official or working...
. In Turkish, the direct object can either have accusative case or have no (visible) case at all; when it has accusative case, it is interpreted as specific (e.g. one specific person), and otherwise it is interpreted as nonspecific (e.g. some person).
This is different from what happens in non-DOM languages, where all direct objects are uniformly marked in the same way; for instance, a language could mark all direct objects with an accusative ending (as in Latin
Latin
Latin is an Italic language originally spoken in Latium and Ancient Rome. It, along with most European languages, is a descendant of the ancient Proto-Indo-European language. Although it is considered a dead language, a number of scholars and members of the Christian clergy speak it fluently, and...
); other language could leave all direct objects without overt marker (as in English
English language
English is a West Germanic language that arose in the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of England and spread into what was to become south-east Scotland under the influence of the Anglian medieval kingdom of Northumbria...
).
Research on DOM
Although the phenomenon has been known for a very long time, it was considered a minor quirk in a few languages until Georg Bossong, during the eighties, presented evidence of DOM in more than 300 languages.. Since then, it has become an important topic of research in grammatical theory. This is a selection of works that deal with the phenomenon:- Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. Economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21:435–448.http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/nala/2003/00000021/00000003/05118081
- Bittner, Maria. 1994. Case, scope, and binding. Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory v. 30. Dordrecht ; Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.http://www.springer.com/new+&+forthcoming+titles+(default)/book/978-0-7923-2649-6
- Bossong, Georg. 1983–1984. Animacy and Markedness in Universal Grammar. Glossologia 2–3:7–20.http://www.rose.uzh.ch/seminar/personen/bossong/Bossong_39.pdf
- Bossong, Georg. 1985. Empirische Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objektmarkierung in der neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.
- Bossong, Georg. 1991. Differential object marking in Romance and beyond. In New Analyses in Romance Linguistics, Selected Papers from the XVIII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages 1988, eds. D. Wanner and D. Kibbee, 143–170. Amsterdam: Benjamins.http://www.benjamins.com/cgi-bin/t_bookview.cgi?bookid=CILT%2069
- Bossong, Georg. 1997. Le Marquage Différentiel de L'Objet dans les Langues d'Europe. In Actance et Valence dans les Langues d'Europe, ed. J. Feuillet, 193–258. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyte.
- Brugé, Laura, and Brugger, Gerhard. 1996. On the Accusative a in Spanish. Probus 8:1–51.
- De Swart, Peter. 2007. Cross-linguistic Variation in Object Marking, University of Nijmegen: PhD Dissertation.http://www.lotpublications.nl/publish/articles/002566/bookpart.pdf
- Heusinger, Klaus von, and Kaiser, Georg A. 2003. Animacy, Specificity, and Definiteness in Spanish. In Proceedings of the Workshop Semantic and Syntactic Aspects of Specificity in Romance Languages. Arbeitspapier 113, eds. Klaus von Heusinger and Georg A. Kaiser, 41–65. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz.http://w3.ub.uni-konstanz.de/v13/volltexte/2006/1720//pdf/AP113_2003.pdf
- Heusinger, Klaus von, and Kaiser, Georg 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”, eds. Klaus von Heusinger, Georg A. Kaiser and Elisabeth Stark, 33–70. Konstanz: Universität Konstanz.http://www.ilg.uni-stuttgart.de/Nereus/events/04NereusII/pdf/abstr_heusinger_kaiser.pdf
- Leonetti, Manuel. 2004. Specificity and Differential Object Marking in Spanish. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 3:75–114.http://www2.uah.es/leonetti/papers/Specif&DOM.pdf
- Öztürk, Balkiz. 2005. Case, Referentiality and Phrase Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.http://www.benjamins.com/cgi-bin/t_bookview.cgi?bookid=LA%2077
- Pensado, Carmen ed. 1995. El complemento directo preposicional. Madrid: Visor.http://tunez.cervantes.es/Biblioteca/Fichas/3267_38_1.shtml
- Rodríguez-Mondoñedo, Miguel. 2007. The Syntax of Objects. Agree and Differential Object Marking, University of Connecticut: PhD Dissertation.http://mypage.iu.edu/~migrodri/papers/rodriguez-mondonedo2007.pdf
- Torrego, Esther. 1998. The dependencies of objects. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, 34. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item/default.asp?ttype=2&tid=4174