Marking of the object in ditransitive pronominal constructions (T) (Udmurt)

PT–R + NoVAgr

PT–R: The objects of monotransitive and ditransitive verbs are marked the same way; the recipient is marked differently.

NoVAgr: The verb does not display agreement with P, T, or R.

(1)dunoskal-ez-lyso-jeśot-i-z.
dearcow3SGDATitACCgivePST3SG
’(S)he gave it to his/her dear cow.’ (http://sp-18.ru/v-krayu-elej-i-italmasov-gde-zapevayut-rodniki/17/)

(2)köńakeuža-jnakolhoz-yn.
how_muchPCLworkPST.1SGstillkolkhozINE
’I worked for a while at the kolkhoz too. ’ (Csúcs 2003: 135)

(3)erikakńigalydʒ́-e.
Erikabookread3SG
’Erika reads books.’ (Y. S.)

(4)erikatakńiga-jezlydʒ́-e.
ErikathisbookACCread3SG
’Erika reads this book.’ (Y. S.)

In Udmurt ditransitive constructions nominal recipients (R) have a dative suffix (1), which is different both from the marking on a pronominal object (T) of the ditransitive verb (1)–(2), and the marking on the nominal P argument of a monotransitive verb (3)–(4). The morphological form of personal pronouns and the demonstrative pronoun so is always accusative (Csúcs 2003: 133–134), whereas general, indefinite and negative pronouns can be marked or unmarked. The nominal object argument of a monotransitive verb can have one of two forms: indefinite/non-specific Ps are morphologically unmarked (3), while definite/specific Ps have accusative case (4) (cf. Csúcs 2003, Keľmakov – Hännikäinen 2008: 31–32, 144–148, É. Kiss – Tánczos 2018). The verb itself does not agree with any of the three functions.

Author: Laura Horváth


[🠐 back]