Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter (A) March 1, 2016

Non-central usages of datives

Gabriele Diewald

Abstract

Non-central usages of datives are defined in terms of increasing deviation from the prototypical, central usage of the dative, i. e. its usage in ditransitive constructions with ‘give’ verbs, on several parameters. The introduction offers an exemplification of the clines of (non-)centrality of dative usages, and specifies the aim of the volume. It also provides an outlook on the individual perspective each contribution takes on this issue.

Abbreviations

acc

accusative

dat

dative

f

feminine

imp

imperative

n

neuter

nom

nominative

pl

plural

prs

present

pst

past

sg

singular

References

Butt, Miriam, Scott Grimm & Tafseer Ahmed. 2006. Dative subjects. Paper presented at NWO/DFG Workshop on Optimal Sentence Processing Nijmegen, June 2006.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2003. Radical construction grammar. Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Diewald, Gabriele. 2013. “Same same but different” – Modal particles, discourse markers and the art (and purpose) of categorization. In Liesbeth Degand, Paola Pietrandrea & Bert Cornillie (eds.), Discourse markers and modal particles. Categorization and description, 19–46. Amsterdam/New York:Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.234.02dieSearch in Google Scholar

Ekberg, Edith. 2012. Aspekte des Dativs. Zur Relation zwischen der Dativ-DP und der Ereignisstruktur der Verben in ditransitiven Konstruktionen im Deutschen (Lunder germanistische Forschungen, 72). Lund: University Lund.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. External possession in a European areal perspective. In Doris L. Payne & Immanuel Barshi (eds.), External possession (Typological Studies in Language, 39), 109–135. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.39.09hasSearch in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2013. Ditransitive constructions: The verb ‘give’. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://wals.info/ chapter/105 (accessed 26 May 2015).Search in Google Scholar

Lee-Schoenfeld, Vera & Gabriele Diewald. 2014. The pragmatics and syntax of German inalienable possession constructions. In Proceedings of the Fortieth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS 40), 289–313.Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 2006. Participant roles, thematic roles and syntactic relations. In Tasaku Tsunoda & Taro Kageyama (eds.), Voice and grammatical relations. Festschrift for Masayoshi Shibatani (Typological Studies in Language, 65), 167–190. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.65.10lehSearch in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian, Yong-Min Shin& Elisabeth Verhoeven. 2004. Direkte und indirekte Partizipation. Zur Typologie der sprachlichen Repräsentation konzeptueller Relationen. Erfurt: Universität Erfurt.Search in Google Scholar

Ogawa, Akio. 2003. Dativ und Valenzerweiterung (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik, 66). Tübingen: Stauffenburg-Verlag.Search in Google Scholar

Primus, Beatrice. 2012. Semantische Rollen. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.Search in Google Scholar

Shibatani, Masayoshi. 1994. An integrational approach to possessor raising, ethical datives and adversative passives. Berkeley Linguistic Society 20. 461–486.10.3765/bls.v20i1.1438Search in Google Scholar

Spencer, Andrew. 2006. Syntactic vs. morphological case: Implications for morphosyntax. In Leonid I. Kulikov, Andrej L. Mal’chukov & Peter de Swart (eds.), Case, valency and transitivity (Studies in Language Companion Series, 77), 3–21. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.77.03speSearch in Google Scholar

Stolz, Thomas, Sonja Kettler, Cornelia Stroh & Aina Urdze (eds.) 2008. Split possession: An areal-linguistic study of the alienability correlation and related phenomena in the languages of Europe (Studies in Language Companion Series, 101). Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.101Search in Google Scholar

Wegener, Heide. 1985. Der Dativ im heutigen Deutsch (Studien zur deutschen Grammatik, 28). Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Wegener, Heide. 1989. Eine Modalpartikel besonderer Art. Der Dativus Ethicus. In Harald Weydt (ed.), Sprechen mit Partikeln, 56–73. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Weiß, Helmut. 2008. The possessor that appears twice? Variation, structure and function of possessive doubling in German. In Sjef Barbiers, Olaf Koeneman, Marika lekakou & Margreet van der Ham (eds.), Microvariation in syntactic doubling, 381–401. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1163/9781848550216_015Search in Google Scholar

Zifonun, Gisela, Ludger Hoffmann & Bruno Strecker. 1997. Grammatik der deutschen Sprache, vol. 3. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110872163Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2016-3-1
Published in Print: 2016-4-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Scroll Up Arrow