Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T06:29:33.071Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Dative Case Marking in Vafsi within the OT Framework

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Mahinnaz Mirdehghan  and
Saeed Reza Yousefi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The dative case in Vafsi appears in three structures: (a) the case of the experiencer in sensory verbs, (b) the case of the indirect object (IO), and (c) the case of the object of the preposition /da/ (to), or the preposition /az/ (to), or the enclitic /-o/ (to), or the object of the postposition /rā/ (for). In Vafsi, as in many other Indo-European languages, sensory verbs necessitate the emergence of quirky subjects which have the experiencer function and are dative case marked. In order to analyze the dative case marking in Vafsi using optimality theory, this article uses the faithfulness constraint of faith-lex and the markedness constraint hierarchy of *ERG≫*DAT≫*ACC≫*NOM. Vafsi always allocates the dative case to the IO of the ditransitive verbs. This phenomenon is illustrated by use of an optimality theory (OT) tableau. Some Vafsi ditransitive verbs dative case mark the IOs using adpositions. If so, Vafsi differential adpositional case marking (DACM) will rule, as the IOs are objects of adposition (OAs) simultaneously.

Keywords

Dative Case MarkingDifferential Dative Case MarkingDifferential Adpositional Case MarkingDifferential Object MarkingQuirky SubjectsVafsi Syntax
Type
Articles
Information
Iranian Studies , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 149 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 The International Society for Iranian Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bickel, B. “The Syntax of Experiencers in the Himalayas.” Paper presented at the meeting for the International Symposium on Non-nominative Subjects, Tokyo, 18–21 December 2001.Google Scholar
Butt, Miriam. Theories of Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Dordrecht: Foris, 1981.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. Knowledge of Language. New York: Praeger, 1986.Google ScholarPubMed
Chomsky, Noam. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W.Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, J. “The Best Clitic: Constraint Conflict in Morphosyntax.” Chap. 2 inElements of Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1997.Google Scholar
Grunow-Harsta, K. “Direction and Differential Dative Case Marking in Magar.” Chap. 4 in Himalayan Languages: Past and Present. The Hague: Mouton de Gruyter, 2004.Google Scholar
Holton, D., MacKridge, P., and Philippaki-Warburton, I.. Greek: A Comprehensive Grammar of the Language. New York: Routledge, 1997.Google Scholar
Mirdehghan, Mahinnaz. Halat-namāi efterāghi dar zabānhay-e hendi/ordu, Pashtu va balochi, dar chārchub-e behinegi vāzh-naghshi [Differential case marking in Hindu/Urdu, Pashto and Balochi Within OT-LFG]. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Mirdehghan, Mahinnaz, and Yousefi, Saeed Reza. “Hālat va hālat-namai dar vafsi” [Case and case marking in Vafsi]. Majale-ye Zabān shenākht [Linguist magazine], no. 5 (2012): 85‒105.Google Scholar
Mirdehghan, Mahinnaz, and Yousefi, Saeed Reza. “Harf-e ezāfe-namāi-ye efterāghidar vafsi dar chārchub-e behinegi” [Adpositional case marking in Vafsi within the OT framework]. Jostār-ha-ye Zabāni [Linguistic research], http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/pdf_12806_af296b9e0137ea5378f4da6bc6be4efe.html. Retrieved on 7 Feb 2016.Google Scholar
Moqadam, Mohammad. Guyeshhāy-e vafs va āshtiān va tafresh [Vafs and Āshtiān and Tafresh dialects]. Tehran: Iran-vij, 1939.Google Scholar
Prince, Alanand, and Smolensky, Paul. “Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar.” PhD diss., Rutgers University, 1993.Google Scholar
Stilo, Donald L. “The Tati Language Group in the Sociolinguistic Context of Northwestern Iran and Transcaucasia.” Iranian Studies, no. 14 (1981): 137‒187. doi: 10.1080/00210868108701585Google Scholar
Stilo, Donald L.Vafsi Folk Tales. Weisbaden: Ludwig Reichert Verlag, 2004.Google Scholar
Stilo, Donald L.“Ditransitive Constructions in Vafsi.” 2006. http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/conference/07_DitransitiveConstructions/pdf/handouts/Handout_Stilo.pdf. Retrieved on 15 July 2015.Google Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. “Case Patterns.” Chap. 16 in Optimality-Theoretic Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. “DSM at Argument Structures, Syntax, and PF.” Chap. 2 in Differential Subject Marking. Dordrecht: Springer, 2009.Google Scholar
Yousefi, Saeed Reza. “Tahlil vœ bœrrœsi-e hālœt vœ hālœt-nœmāi dœr vœfsi dœr čārčub-e behinegi” [Analysis of Vafsi case system within the OT framework].” MA thesis, Shahid Beheshti University, 2012.Google Scholar