Cover not available
Article published In:
Methods for Studying Variation in Partitives
Edited by Petra Sleeman and Anne Tamm
[Linguistic Variation 24:2] 2024
► pp. 189–232

Methodological solutions for researching the variation of partitives in languages with rich nominal morphology

ORCID logo | Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary
This article examines methodologies for studying variation in partitives. It focuses on the challenges for languages with rich nominal morphology. Translation questionnaires have been widely and efficiently applied for discovering variation in Germanic and Romance partitives. We set up a mini questionnaire and provide its answers for Estonian to test the method. The current research situation of the Estonian morphological partitive case variation allows us to spot some inadequacies of this research instrument. We show the complexity of partitive variation across linguistic modules and discuss how the works presented in this volume as well as other related recent research may provide ancillary instruments to mitigate the shortcomings of a translation questionnaire. We close the discussion with some methodological alternatives open to morphologically complex languages in their typical research situations, applied to Beserman pseudo partitives and Ukrainian partitive genitives, and some synergies in recently applied methods.
Keywords: variation in partitives, partitive case, rich nominal morphology, translation questionnaire, mixed methods
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Towards a translation questionnaire targeting the basic distinctions in partitives
  • 3.Questionnaire as a method for PC and PPC
  • 4.Ancillary instruments for variation in languages with rich nominal morphology: The partitive-elative nominal morphology
  • 5.Methodological challenges for languages with morphological partitive cases
    • 5.1Challenges in morphophonology
    • 5.2Predicate related categories: Verbs and embedded structures
    • 5.3Pragmatics and semantics
    • 5.4Other factors: Pragmatics, discourse, and animacy
    • 5.5Conclusive remarks on Section 5
  • 6.Combinations of methods for two research situations
    • 6.1Research situations of languages with rich nominal morphology
    • 6.2Mixed methods for Beserman pseudo partitives
    • 6.3Corpus methods for Ukrainian partitive genitives
    • 6.4Summary of Section 6
  • 7.New research and examples of good practices
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations in the functional glossing in this article
  • References
Published online: 25 September 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.24030.tam
References (105)
References
Ahn, Dorothy & Uli Sauerland. 2017. Measure constructions with relative measures: Towards a syntax of non-conservative construals. The Linguistic Review, 34 1, 215–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Al Siyabi, Iman. 2022. New Media Technologies for Learning to Use “one in three” Partitives. Poster presentation, PARTE 2022 conference: Methods for approaching variation: partitives and beyond. Budapest, Hungary: Károli Gáspár Református Egyetem. [URL]
Al Siyabi, Iman, Maris Camilleri & Anne Tamm. 2023. Fractional proportional partitives (FPP): focus on the variation in “one in three” partitives and agreement in Maltese, Gulf, Tunisian and Standard Arabic. In Hajner, Réka, Kata Kubínyi, Dóra Pődör & Anne Tamm (eds.). European Partitives in comparison. [Károli Theoretical and Experimental Research in Linguistics/Elméleti és kísérleti nyelvészeti kutatások 1]. 115–151. Budapest/Paris: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary/L’Harmattan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Argus, Reili. 2008. Eesti keele muutemorfoloogia omandamine [Acquisition of Estonian morphology]. Tallinn: Tallinn University PhD dissertation.
Argus, Reili & Helle Metslang. 2023. North and Standard Estonian. In Daniel Abondolo & Riitta Valijärvi (eds.), The Uralic Languages, 347–385. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bakardzhieva-Morikang, Svitlana & Krasimir Kabakčiev. 2024. Ukrainian biaspectuality: An instantiation of compositional aspect in a verbal-aspect language. East European Journal of Psycholinguistics, 11 (1), 28–46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Basile, Rodolfo. 2024. ‘I Am Also Found on Facebook’. In Elvira Glaser, Petra Sleeman, Thomas Strobel & Anne Tamm (eds.), Partitive constructions and partitive elements within and across language borders in Europe (LiVVaL — Linguaggio e Variazione. Variation in Language 3), 153–172. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. [URL]
Berends, Sanne. 2019. Acquiring Dutch quantitative ER. Amsterdam: LOT Publications 5471. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bleotu, Adina Camelia. 2023. Agreement with collective nouns in English and Romanian. A distributional approach. Talk at “Crosslinguistic perspectives on partitivity and related phenomena”, Bucharest, November 24–25, 2023.
Brandner, Ellen. 2024. The Indefinite Article as an Exponent for Partition. In Elvira Glaser, Petra Sleeman, Thomas Strobel & Anne Tamm (eds.), Partitive constructions and partitive elements within and across language borders in Europe (LiVVaL — Linguaggio e Variazione. Variation in Language 3), 19–54. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. [URL]. DOI logo
Caha, Pavel. 2021. The marking of mass, count and plural denotations in multi-dimensional paradigms. Studia Linguistica, 76(1), 1–63.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna & Giuliana Giusti. 2020. Indefinite determiners in informal Italian: A preliminary analysis. Linguistics, 58(3), 679–712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Carlier, Anne & Beatrice Lamiroy. 2014. The grammaticalization of the prepositional partitive in Romance. In Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter, 477–519. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chaika, Lesia, Natalia Lehka, Anne Tamm & Natalia Vaiss. 2024. Ukrainian aspect and object case in ukTenTen. The partitive genitive of perfective verbs and mass nouns. In Elvira Glaser, Petra Sleeman, Thomas Strobel & Anne Tamm (eds.), Partitive constructions and partitive elements within and across language borders in Europe (LiVVaL — Linguaggio e Variazione. Variation in Language 3), 173–223. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. [URL]. DOI logo
Cornips, Leonie & Petra Sleeman. 2024. Variation in the use of the partitive pronoun ER in regional (Heerlen) standard Dutch. In Anne Tamm & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Methods for approaching variation: partitive constructions and partitive elements, special issue of Linguistic Variation.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
. DOI logo
Davatz, Jan, Tabea Ihsane & Elisabeth Stark. 2023. Enquêtes dialectologiques à Evolène : les articles dits ‘partitifs’ et leurs équivalents. In Dorothée Aquino-Weber, Sara Cotelli Kureth, Andres Kristol, Aurélie Reusser-Elzingre & Maguelone Sauzet (eds.). “Coum’on étèila que kòoule… Come una stella cadente… Comme une étoile filante…”. Mélanges à la mémoire de Federica Diémoz, 65–85. Neuchâtel, Switzerland: Librairie Droz.
CrossRef DOI logo with hyperlink to permanent DOI
Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den & Éva Dékány. 2018. Adpositions and case: Alternative realisation and concord. Finno-Ugric Languages and Linguistics 71. 39–75.Google Scholar
Dirdal, Hildegunn, Eva Thue Vold, Ingrid Kristine Hasund, Eli-Marie Danbolt Drange & Elin Maria Berg. 2022. Design and construction of the Tracking Written Learner Language (TRAWL) Corpus: A longitudinal and multilingual young learner corpus. Nordic Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 10 (2), 115–135, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehala, Martin. 2009. Keelekontakti mõju eesti sihitiskäänete kasutamisele [The impact of language contact on the usage of the Estonian object cases]. Keel ja Kirjandus, 31, 182–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Etxeberria, Urtzi. 2021. The partitive marker in Basque and its relation to bare nouns and the definite article. In Petra Sleeman & Giuliana Giusti (eds.), Partitive determiners, partitive pronouns and partitive case (Linguistische Arbeiten 580), 319–355. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Falco, Michelangelo & Roberto Zamparelli. 2019. Partitives and partitivity. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 4(1), 1–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garzonio, Jacopo & Cecilia Poletto. 2020. Partitive objects in negative contexts in Northern Italian Dialects. Linguistics, 58 (3), 621–650. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giusti, Giuliana & Petra Sleeman. 2021. Partitive elements in the languages of Europe. An advancement in the understanding of a multifaceted phenomenon. In Petra Sleeman & Giuliana Giusti (eds.), Partitive determiners, partitive pronouns and partitive case (Linguistische Arbeiten 580), 1–30. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graën, Johannes, Dolores Batinic & Martin Volk. 2014. Cleaning the Europarl corpus for linguistic applications. In Josef Ruppenhofer & Gertrud Faaß (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th edition of the KONVENS conference, 222–227. Hildesheim: Universitätsverlag Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Glaser, Elvira. 2024. Bare nouns, indefinite articles and partitivity in an Early New High German cookbook. In Anne Tamm & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Methods for approaching variation: partitive constructions and partitive elements, special issue of Linguistic Variation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glaser, Elvira & Thomas Strobel. 2020. The rise and fall of partitive markers in some Germanic varieties. In Ihsane, Tabea (ed.). Disentangling Bare Nouns and Nominals Introduced by a Partitive Article. 17–53. Leiden/Boston: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hajner, Réka, Kata Kubínyi, Dóra Pődör & Anne Tamm (eds.). 2023. European Partitives in comparison. [Károli Theoretical and Experimental Research in Linguistics/Elméleti és kísérleti nyelvészeti kutatások 1], Budapest/Paris: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary/L’Harmattan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoop, Helen de. 1992. Case configuration and Noun Phrase interpretation. Groningen: University of Groningen PhD dissertation.
. 2003. Partitivity. In Lisa Cheng & Rint Sybesma (eds.), The second Glot International state-of-the-article book, 179–212. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. (Hoop, Helen de. 2002. Partitivity. In The Second Glot International State-Of-the-Article Book (Originally published 2003, 611, 179–212). De Gruyter, Inc. DOI logo, [URL])
Huhmarniemi, Saara & Merilin Miljan. 2016. The partitive split in Finnish and Estonian. Finno-Ugric Languages and Linguistics, 5(1), 38–76. [URL]
Huumo, Tuomas & Liina Lindström. 2014. Partitives across constructions: on the range of uses of the Finnish and Estonian “partitive subjects” In Luraghi, Silvia & Tuomas Huumo (eds.). Partitive Cases and Related Categories, 153−176. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ihsane, Tabea & Elisabeth Stark. 2020. Introduction: Shades of partitivity: Formal and areal properties. Linguistics, 58 (3), 605–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds.) 2020. Special Issue: Shades of partitivity: Formal and areal properties. Linguistics, 58(3). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivaska, Ilmari & Anne Tamm. 2024. Same yet different: Distributional differences in the use of partitive objects in Estonian and Finnish. In Anne Tamm & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Methods for approaching variation: partitive constructions and partitive elements, special issue of Linguistic Variation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1977. X-bar syntax: A study of phrase structure (Linguistic Inquiry Monograph No. 2). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jurkiewicz-Rohrbacher, Edyta. 2019. Polish verbal aspect and its Finnish statistical correlates in the light of a parallel corpus. University of Helsinki and University of Regensburg: doctoral dissertation. [URL].Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Pavel Rychlý, Pavel Smrz & David Tugwell. 2004. The Sketch Engine. In Geoffrey Williams & Sandra Vessier (eds.), Proceedings of the eleventh EURALEX international congress, 105–15. Lorient, France: Université de Bretagne Sud.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1998. Partitive case and aspect. In Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors, 265–307. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Klockmann, Heidi & Lenka Garshol. 2023. Agreement errors in Norwegian L1, English L2 pseudo partitive. (Talk) “ Crosslinguistic perspectives on partitivity and related phenomena” Bucharest, November 24–25, 2023. Bucharest; Romania.
Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria. 2001. “A piece of the cake” and “a cup of tea”: partitive and pseudo partitive nominal constructions in the Circum-Baltic languages. In Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), The Circum-Baltic languages. Volume 2: Grammar and typology, 523–568. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 2004. Telicity and the meaning of objective case. In Jacqueline Guéron & Jacqueline Lecarme (eds.), The syntax of time, 389–424. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kubínyi, Kata & Anne Tamm. 2023. Introduction to European Partitives in Comparison. In Hajner, Réka, Kata Kubínyi, Dóra Pődör & Anne Tamm (eds.). European Partitives in comparison. [Károli Theoretical and Experimental Research in Linguistics/Elméleti és kísérleti nyelvészeti kutatások 1]. 9–40. Budapest/Paris: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary/L’Harmattan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuznetsova, Julia & Tore Nesset. 2015. In which case are Russians afraid? Bojat’sja with genitive and accusative objects. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 23(2), 255–83. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laugalienė, Asta. 2022. Partitivity in Finnish and Lithuanian: object marking. Vilnius: Vilnius University doctoral dissertation.
Lees, Aet. 2015. Case alternations in five Finnic languages: Estonian, Finnish, Karelian, Livonian and Veps. Leiden: Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia. 2023. Beyond affectedness — partitive objects and degrees of agenthood in Ancient Greek. Linguistic Variation, 23(1), 95–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luraghi, Silvia & Seppo Kittilä. 2014. Partitive noun phrases in the Estonian core argument system. In Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories, 17–62. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyutikova, Ekaterina. 2023. Person Agreement with Anaphors: Evidence from Tatar. Languages, 81, 46. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metslang, Helena. 2013. Grammatical relations in Estonian: Subject, object and beyond. (Dissertationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 33). Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
. 2014. Partitive noun phrases in the Estonian core argument system. In Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories, 177–255. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metslang, Helle. 2023. North and Standard Estonian. In Marianne Bakró-Nagy, Johanna Laakso & Elena Skribnik (eds.), Oxford Guide to the Uralic Languages, 350–366. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Metslang, Helle & Külli Habicht. 2023. Partitive, genitive or nominative? In Silvia Luraghi & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Partitives cross-linguistically, special issue of Linguistic Variation 23(1), 157–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mežov, Oleksandr. 2008. Osoblyvostі vžyvannja rodovoho vіdmіnka u vtorynnіj semantyko-syntaksyčnіj funkcіjі ob’jekta [Features of the use of genitive case in the secondary semantic-syntactical function of object]. Fіlolohіčnі nauky: Movoznavstvo 101, 69–74. [URL]
Miestamo, Matti, Anne Tamm & Beáta Wagner-Nagy (eds.). (2015). Negation in Uralic Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Typological Studies in Language 108. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Diane. 1998. Grammatical case assignment in Finnish. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Norris, Mark. 2015. Case-marking in Estonian pseudopartitives. In Anna E. Jurgensen, Hannah Sande, Spencer Lamoureux, Kenny Baclawski & Alison Zerbe (eds.), Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS) 41 1, 371–395. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina. 2003. Possessive Affixes in the Pragmatic Structuring of the Utterance: Evidence from Uralic. In Pirkko Suihkonen & Bernard Comrie (eds.), International Symposium on Deictic Systems and Quantification in Languages Spoken in Europe and North and Central Asia. Collection of Papers. Iževsk and Leipzig: Udmurt State University and Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, 130–145.Google Scholar
Ogren, David Paul. 2018. Object case in Estonian da-infinitive constructions (Dissertationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 41). Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Panka, Erzsébet. 2023. Object cases, definiteness, and aspect in Finnish and Hungarian. How Hungarian learners of Finnish use the partitive and total object cases. In Hajner, Réka, Kata Kubínyi, Dóra Pődör & Anne Tamm (eds.). European Partitives in comparison. [Károli Theoretical and Experimental Research in Linguistics/Elméleti és kísérleti nyelvészeti kutatások 1]. 43–68. Budapest/Paris: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary/L’Harmattan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pajusalu, Renate. 2006. Multiple Motivations for Meaning of an Elative Wh-Construction in Estonian. Trames Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 10(4), 324–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pfaff, Alexander. 2024a. Dimensions of Partitivity in Icelandic (and beyond). In Anne Tamm & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Methods for approaching variation: partitive constructions and partitive elements, special issue of Linguistic Variation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2024b. Pseudo partitives and Individuation. In Elvira Glaser, Petra Sleeman, Thomas Strobel & Anne Tamm (eds.), Partitive constructions and partitive elements within and across language borders in Europe (LiVVaL — Linguaggio e Variazione. Variation in Language 3), 55–75. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. [URL]
Pinzin, Francesco & Cecilia Poletto. 2021. Indefinite objects in micro-variation. A cross-linguistic analysis of the distribution of partitive articles, bare nominals and definite determiners in Northern Italy. Studia Linguistica 751, 1–43.Google Scholar
. 2022a. An indefinite maze: on the distribution of partitives and bare nouns in the Northern Italian dialects. Isogloss 8(2)/20. 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2022b. How to make do with what you have got: Priming effects in dialectal data, the view from indefinite Partitives (Conference Presentation). ‘Partitive Articles’ in Francoprovençal and in the Northern Italian Dialects: DiFuPaRo closing workshop, 24 June 2022, Universität Zürich, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Pljušč, Marija J. 2018. Katehorіjі sub’jekta і ob’jekta v strukturі prostoho rečennja. [Category of subject and object in structure of simple sentence]. Kyiv: Vidavnyctvo NPU іmenі M. P. Drahomanova.Google Scholar
Pool, Raili. 2007. Eesti keele teise keelena omandamise seaduspärasusi täis — ja osasihitise näitel [The acquisition of total and partial objects by learners of Estonian as a second language] (Dissertationes Philologiae Estonicae Universitatis Tartuensis 19). Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus.
Pugh, Stefan Morgenschweis & Jeffrey Ian Press. 1999. Ukrainian: A Comprehensive Grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rueter, Jack & Nadežda Kabaeva. 2023. On quantification and the ablative in Erzya and Moksha. In Hajner, Réka, Kata Kubínyi, Dóra Pődör & Anne Tamm (eds.). European Partitives in comparison. [Károli Theoretical and Experimental Research in Linguistics/Elméleti és kísérleti nyelvészeti kutatások 1]. 69–97. Budapest/Paris: Károli Gáspár University of the Reformed Church in Hungary/L’Harmattan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sauerland, Uli & Kazuko Yatsushiro. 2017. Two Nouns in Partitives: Evidence from Japanese. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2(1), 13, 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1977. Some remarks on noun phrase structure. In Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow & Adrian Akmajian (eds.), Formal syntax, 285–316. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Serdobolskaya, Natalia & Maria Usacheva. 2023. Pseudo partitive constructions are not a subtype of nominal juxtaposition in Beserman. Journal of Uralic Linguistics 2(2), 243–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seržant, Ilja. 2021a. Diachronic Typology of Partitives. In Petra Sleeman & Giuliana Giusti (eds.), Partitive Determiners, Partitive Pronouns and Partitive Case, 111–167. Berlin: de Gruyter, Linguistische Arbeiten 580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021b. Typology of Partitives. Linguistics 59(4), 881–947. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ševčuk, Natalia. 2010. Hramatyčnі osoblyvostі ob’jekta pry dіjeslovax na poznačennja tvorennja. [Grammatical features of the object with verbs denoting creation]. Kul’tura slova 721, 126–132.Google Scholar
Simonenko, Alexandra. 2019. Microvariation in Finno-Ugric possessive markers. In Hsin-Lun Huang, Ethan Poole & Amanda Rysling (eds.), The North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 43 1, 1–12. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Sleeman, Petra & Tabea Ihsane. 2016. Gender mismatches in partitive constructions with superlatives in French. Glossa 1(1), 1–25.Google Scholar
. 2017. The L2 acquisition of the French quantitative pronoun en by L1 learners of Dutch: vulnerable domains and cross-linguistic influence. In Elma Blom, Leonie Cornips & Jeannette Schaeffer (eds.). Cross-linguistic Influence in Bilingualism. In honor of Aafke Hulk. 303–330. [Studies in Bilingualism 52]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Convergence and divergence in the expression of partitivity: a cross-linguistic experimental study. Linguistics 58:3. 767–804. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. The L2 acquisition of the quantitative pronoun in French by L1 speakers of German and the role of the L1. In Giuliana Giusti & Petra Sleeman (eds.). Partitive Determiners, Partitive Pronouns and Partitive Case. Linguistische Arbeiten. 205–236. Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spoelman, Marianne. 2013. Prior linguistic knowledge matters. The use of the partitive case in Finnish learner language. Oulu: Acta Universitatis Ouluensis B Humaniora 111.Google Scholar
Sleeman, Petra & Silvia Luraghi. 2023. Crosslinguistic variation in partitives. In Silvia Luraghi & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Partitives cross-linguistically, special issue of Linguistic Variation 23(1), 1–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stark, Elisabeth & Jan Pavel Davatz. 2021. Unexpected Partitive Articles in Francoprovençal. Studia Linguistica 76(1). [Special issue edited by Francesco Pinzin & Cecilia Poletto].101–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stark, Elisabeth & David Paul Gerards. 2020. ‘Partitive Articles’ in Aosta Valley Francoprovençal — Old Questions and New Data. In Tabea Ihsane (ed.), Disentangling Bare Nouns and Nominals Introduced by a Partitive Article (Syntax & Semantics 43), Leiden/Boston: Brill, 301–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stark, Elisabeth & Paul Widmer. 2020. Breton a-marking of (internal) verbal arguments: A result of language contact?. Linguistics, 58 (3), 745–766. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Strobel, Thomas. 2012. On the areal and syntactic distribution of indefinite-partitive pronouns in German: methodological advances and empirical results within the project ‘Syntax of Hessian Dialects’ (SyHD). In Álvarez Pérez, Xosé Afonso, Ernestina Carrilho & Catarina Magro (eds.). Proceedings of the International Symposium on Limits and Areas in Dialectology (LimiAr). Lisbon, 2011. 405–430. Lisboa: Centro de Linguística da Universidade de Lisboa. [URL]Google Scholar
Tamm, Anne. 2011. Scalarity and dimensionality across categories. Estonian pseudopartitive constructions. Linguistica Uralica 47(1), 22–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. The partitive concept versus linguistic partitives: from abstract concepts to evidentiality in the Uralic languages. In Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds.), Partitive cases and related categories, 89–152. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. The Dutch partitive and quantitative pronoun “er” in lexicography: preliminary notes. In Tibor M. Pintér & Katalin P. Márkus (eds.) Az ige vonzásában: Lexikográfiai, fordítástudományi tanulmányok és köszöntők Magay Tamás 90. születésnapjára, 90–106. Budapest: Tinta Kiadó.Google Scholar
Tamm, Anne & Natalia Vaiss. 2019. Setting the boundaries: Partitive verbs in Estonian verb classifications. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamat. Estonian Papers in Applied Linguistics 151, 159–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tiborcz-Tóth, Tünde. 2017. Magyarul tanulók köztes nyelvére vonatkozó megfigyelések észt forrásnyelvi környezetben — különös tekintettel a határozottság kifejezésére a magyarban. [Some observations about the Interlanguage of Hungarian-learners in Estonian source language environment focusing on the determinative system of Hungarian]. Pécs: University of Pécs PhD dissertation. [URL]
Tănase-Dogaru, Mihaela. 2022. Size nouns in Romanian. Gliding along the quantifying — evaluating continuum. Bulletin of the Transilvania University of Braşov Series IV: Philology and Cultural Studies 15(64)21, 93–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tóth, Gabriella, Kata Kubínyi & Anne Tamm. 2024. Possessive partitive strategies in Uralic: Evidence from Mari and Hungarian quantifiers and inflected adpositions. In Elvira Glaser, Petra Sleeman, Thomas Strobel & Anne Tamm (eds.), Partitive constructions and partitive elements within and across language borders in Europe (LiVVaL — Linguaggio e Variazione. Variation in Language 3), 101–126. Venice: Edizioni Ca’ Foscari. [URL]. DOI logo
Vainikka, Anne. 1993. The three structural cases in Finnish. In Anders Holmberg & Urpo Nikanne (eds.), Case and other functional categories in Finnish syntax, 129–159. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vainikka, Anne & Joan Maling. 1996. Is partitive case inherent or structural? In Jack Hoeksema (ed.), Partitives. Studies on the distribution and meaning of partitive expressions, 179–208. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vainikka, Anne & Pauli Brattico. 2011. The Finnish accusative. Biolinguistica Fennica Working Papers 21, 33–58. [URL]. (4 Jun, 2023.)
Vaiss, Natalia. 2022. Eesti vaatama-verbi ja selle vene ja ukraina vastete sihilisusest. [On the transitivity of the verb ‘watch’/’look’ in Estonian, Russian and Ukrainian]. Lähivõrdlusi. Lähivertailuja, 321, 213–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Verkuyl, Henk. 2022. The compositional nature of tense, mood and aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Vihman, Virve-Anneli, Anna Theakston & Elena Lieven 2020. Acquisition of symmetrical and asymmetrical Differential Object Marking subsystems in Estonian. In Mardale, Alexandru & Silvina Montrul (eds.). Acquisition of Differential Object Marking [Trends in Language Acquisition Research, 26], 21–49. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Von Heusinger, Klaus & Jaklin Kornfilt. 2017. Partitivity and Case Marking in Turkish and Related Languages. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 2(1), 201, 1–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Von Heusinger & Jaklin Kornfilt. 2021. Turkish partitive constructions and (non-)exhaustivity. In Giusti, Giuliana & Petra Sleeman (eds.), Partitive determiners, partitive pronouns and partitive case, 263–294. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vyxovanec’, Іvan & Kateryna Horodens’ka. 2004. Teoretyčna morfolohіja ukrajіns’kojі movy [Theoretical morphology of Ukrainian]. Kyіv: Ukraіns’ke vidavnictvo “Pul’sari”.Google Scholar
Westveer, Thom, Petra Sleeman & Enoch O. Aboh. 2021. Competing genders: French partitive constructions between grammatical and semantic gender. In Marc-Olivier Hinzelin, Natasha Pomino & Eva-Maria Remberger (eds.), Formal approaches to Romance morphosyntax, 49–87. Linguistische Arbeiten 576. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Resources
uktenten 2020 = [URL]