DOI:10.30842/alp23065737193611633
Shuvalova V. P. Strategii markirovaniya
obyekta v khristianskom urmiyskom idiome sela Urmiya. Acta
Linguistica Petropolitana. 611–633.
This paper is dedicated to the Differential Object Marking
system in the Christian Urmi idiom (NENA dialects < Semitic <
Afro-Asiatic language family), spoken in the village of Urmiya,
Russia. Both indexing and flagging are employed in this idiom for
object marking, with either technique showing rather optional use.
The paper investigates the way the prominence of a direct object on
the one hand, and the informational structure on the other,
influence the object marking. The study is based on material that
includes texts obtained by elicitation, recorded spontaneous texts,
and a fairy tale translated specifically for the research. The
findings show the effects of the direct object’s prominence to be
typologically expected, with the following restrictions coming into
play: inanimate objects cannot be marked by flagging, while
interlocutors, on the contrary, tend to be more frequently marked
by means of flagging. Christian Urmi has three sets of indexes that
are selected depending on the aspect and tense form of the verb.
The frequency of using these sets of indexes varies greatly, with
flagging preferably chosen for past tense and indexing mostly found
with present-stem-derived forms. In progressive and resultative
tenses, indexes and flagging show equal frequency of occurrence.
The influence of the informational structure seems to be as
follows. Flagging is used to encode direct objects which have been
a) shifted from their subject role, b) disrupted by other referents
in the immediately preceding register, or c) which occur with verbs
that imply a high level of the object’s involvement.
Keywords
differential object marking, verb indexing,
flagging, information structure, Semitic, Neo-Aramaic
References
Agassiyev 2007
S. A. Agassiyev. Grammatika
sovremennogo assiriyskogo yazyka [A Grammar of Modern Assyrian].
Russian State Pedagogical University in the name of A. I. Herzen
Press, 2007.
Aissen 2003
J. Aissen. Differential Object
Marking. Iconicity vs. Economy. Natural Language & Linguistic
Theory. 2003. Vol 21. № 3. P. 435–483.
Baerman 2007
M. Baerman. Morphological reversals.
Journal of linguistics. 2007. Vol. 43. № 1. P.
33–61.
Comrie et al. 2008
B. Comrie, M. Haspelmath, B. Bickel.
The Leipzig Glossing Rules: Conventions for interlinear
morpheme-by-morpheme glosses About the rules. Department of
Linguistics of the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary
Anthropology & the Department of Linguistics of the University of
Leipzig. 2008. Retrieved January, 28. P. 2010.
Dalrymple, Nikolaeva 2011
M. Dalrymple, I. Nikolaeva.
Objects and information structure. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2011.
de Swart 2007
P. de Swart. Cross-linguistic
variation in object marking. Dissertation. Nijmegen: Radboud
University, 2007.
Du Bois 1987
J. W. Du Bois. The discourse basis of
ergativity. Language. 1987. Vol. 63. No. 4. P.
805–855.
Givón 1983
T. Givón. Topic continuity in
discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1983. P. 1–41.
Haig 2018
G. Haig, Geoffrey. 2018. The
grammaticalization of object pronouns: Why differential object
indexing is an attractor state. Linguistics. 2018. Vol.
56. № 4. P. 781–818. DOI: 10.1515/ling-2018-0011.
Hammarström et al.
H. Hammarström, R. Forkel, M.
Haspelmath, S. Bank. 2022. Glottolog 4.6. URL:
https://glottolog.org/resource/languoid/id/urmi1250#refs (accessed:
18.04.2023).
Haspelmath 2008
M. Haspelmath. Frequency vs.
iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive
Linguistics. 2008. Vol. 19. № 1. P. 1–33.
Hoberman 1988
R. D. Hoberman. Emphasis harmony in a
Modern Aramaic dialect. Language. 1988. Vol. 64. No. 1. P.
1–26.
Iemmolo, Klumpp 2014
G. Iemmolo, G. Klumpp. Introduction.
Linguistics. Special issue on differential object marking.
2014. Vol. 52. № 2. P. 271–279.
Iemmolo 2010
G. Iemmolo. Topicality and
differential object marking. Evidence from Romance and beyond.
Studies in Language. 2010. Vol. 34. № 2. P. 239–272.
Iemmolo 2011
G. Iemmolo. Differential object
marking. Dissertation. Pavia: University of Pavia, 2011.
Khan 2016
G. Khan. The Neo-Aramaic Dialect
of the Assyrian Christians of Urmi. Vols. 1–4. Leiden; Boston:
Brill, 2016.
Mulder 2014
M. Mulder. Differential object
marking in Semitic. Master thesis. University of Amsterdam.
2014. P. 32.
Murre-van den Berg 1999
H. L. Murre-van den Berg. From a
spoken to a written language. The introduction and development of
literary Urmia Aramaic in the nineteenth century. Leiden:
Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1999.
Nikolaeva 1999
I. Nikolaeva. Object agreement,
grammatical relations, and information structure. Studies in
Language. 1999. Vol. 23. P. 331–376.
Nikolaeva 2001
I. Nikolaeva. Secondary topic as a
relation in information structure. Linguistics. 2001. Vol.
39. № 1. P. 1–49.
Ovsjannikova et al. in
process
M. Ovsjannikova, E. Zabelina, K.
Kozhanov. Non-Urmi Northeastern Neo-Aramaic varieties in the
village of Urmiya, Russia. Pt. 1–2. In process.
Pennacchietti, Tosco 1991
F. Pennacchietti, M. Tosco. Testi
Neo-Aramaici dell’Unione Sovietica: Raccolti Da Enrico
Cerulli. Napoli: Istituto universitario orientale,
Dipartimento di studi asiatici, 1991.
Sarkisov 2017
I. V. Sarkisov. Differentsirovannoye
markirovaniye obyekta v khristianskom urmiyskom dialekte
novoarameyskogo yazyka [Differential object marking in the
Christian Urmi dialect of the Neo-Aramaic language]. Acta
Linguistica Petropolitana. 2017. Vol. XIII. Pt. 3. P.
371–392.
Sarkisov 2018
I. V. Sarkisov. K voprosu ob
ergativnosti v novoarameyskikh yazykakh [On the problem of
ergativity in Neo-Aramaic languages] [Ergativity in Neo-Aramaic
languages revisited]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. Vol.
XIV. Pt. 2. P. 380–399.
Say 2020
S. S. Say. Markirovaniye aktantov
dvukhmestnykh predikatov v novoarameyskikh idiomakh sela Urmiya
[Two-argument predicate marking in the Neo-Aramaic idioms of the
village of Urmiya]. Acta Linguistica Petropolitana. 2020.
Vol. 2. Pt. XVI. P. 654–689.
Siewierska 1999
A. Siewierska. From anaphoric pronoun
to grammatical agreement marker: Why objects donʼt make it.
Folia Linguistica. 1999. Vol. 33. P. 225–251.
Tsereteli 1964
K. G. Tsereteli. Sovremennyy
assiriyskiy yazyk [Modern Assyrian languages]. Moscow: Nauka,
Central Dept. of Oriental Literature. 1964.