Cover not available
Part of
Grammatical Relations and their Non-Canonical Encoding in Baltic
Edited by Axel Holvoet and Nicole Nau
[Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic 1] 2014
► pp. 43–95

Case and word order in Lithuanian infinitival clauses revisited

ORCID logo | Institute of Slavic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences | Russian State University for the Humanities | Sholokhov Moscow State University for the Humanities | Vilnius University
This paper considers the Lithuanian constructions with the Dative and Genitive marking of direct objects of transitive verbs in purpose infinitival clauses, studied in Franks and Lavine (2006). I adduce empirical evidence and conceptual arguments both speaking against the analysis proposed by Franks and Lavine (2006), and argue for a different account based on recent “non-orthodox” proposals in case theory. My analysis of the Lithuanian constructions is inspired by a typological comparison with Australian languages possessing “complementizing” and “associating” case marking and morphological case-stacking. I propose that the mechanism of multiple case assignment in syntax is operative in Lithuanian and show how it can naturally account for the Dative-plus-Infinitive and Genitive-plus-Infinitive constructions.
Published online: 16 May 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/vargreb.1.02ark
References (51)
References
Ambrazas, Vytautas. 1981. Zur Geschichte einer indogermanischen Konstruktion (Dativus cum infinitivo im Baltischen). Kalbotyra 32(3), 12–24.Google Scholar
. 1987. Die indogermanische Grundlage des Dativus und Nominativus cum infinitivo im Baltischen. Indogermanische Forschungen 92, 203–219.Google Scholar
(ed). 1997. Lithuanian Grammar . Vilnius: Baltos Lankos.Google Scholar
Anderson, Cori. 2011. Case theory and case alternations: Evidence from Lithuanian. Baltic Linguistics 2, 9–35.Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Non-Canonical Case Patterns in Lithuanian. In Contemporary Approaches to Baltic Linguistics , Peter Arkadiev, Axel Holvoet & Björn Wiemer (eds). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logo
Arkadiev, Peter [Arkad’ev P.M.] 2013. O tipologičeskom svoeobrazii litovskoj glagol’noj sistemy [On the typological peculiarity of the Lithuanian verbal system]. In Issledovanija po tipologii slavjanskix, baltijskix i balkanskix jazykov [Studies in the typology of Slavic, Baltic and Balkan Languages], Vjačeslav V. Ivanov, Peter M. Arkad’ev (eds), 320–361. St Petersburg: Aleteia.Google Scholar
. Forthcoming. Marking of subjects and objects in Lithuanian non-finite clauses: A typological and diachronic perspective. Linguistic Typology . DOI logo
Austin, Peter. 2009. Issues in the synchrony and diachrony of case marking in the Mantharta and Kanyara languages, Australia. Handout of talk at Case in and Across Languages , Helsinki.Google Scholar
Babby, Leonard H. 1986. The locus of case assignment and the direction of percolation: Case theory and Russian. In Case in Slavic , Richard Brecht & James Levine (eds), 170–219 . Columbus, OH: Slavica.Google Scholar
1994. Case theory. In Noam Chomsky: Critical assessments . Vol. I: Linguistics: Tome II , Carlos P. Otero (ed), 630–652. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Béjar, Susanne & Massam, Diane. 1999. Multiple case checking. Syntax 2(2), 65–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan D. & Wurmbrand, Susi. 2009. Case in GB/Minimalism. In The Oxford Handbook of Case , Andrej Malchukov and Andrew Spencer (eds), 44–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Brezar, Mojca Schlamberger, Pogacnik, Vladimir & Perko, Gregor. 2005. Parlons slovène . Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures . Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik , Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds), 89–115. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language , Michael Kenstowicz (ed), 1–73. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
den Dikken, Marcel, Larson, Richard K. & Ludlow, Peter. 1996. Intensional ‘transitive’ verbs and concealed complement clauses. Revista di linguistica 8, 29–46.Google Scholar
Dench, Alan. 2009. Case in an Australian language. Distribution of case and multiple case marking in Nyamal. In The Oxford Handbook of Case , Andrej Malchukov and Andrew Spencer (eds), 756–769. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dench, Alan & Evans, Nicholas. 1988. Multiple case-marking in Australian languages. Australian Journal of Linguistics 8(1), 1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erschler, David. 2009. On case conflicts in Russian: An Optimality-Theoretic approach. In Studies in Formal Slavic Phonology, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics and Information Structure. Proceedings of FDSL 7, Leipzig 2007 , Gerhild Zybatow, Uwe Junghanns, Denisa Lenertova & Petr Biskup (eds), 119–131. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Evans, Nicholas. 1995a. A Grammar of Kayardild . Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1995b. Multiple case in Kayardild: Anti-iconic suffix ordering and the diachronic filter. In Double Case. Agreement by Suffixaufnahme , Frans Plank (ed), 396–428. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Franks, Steven & Lavine, James E. 2006. Case and word order in Lithuanian. Journal of Linguistics 42(1), 239–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert, Nuñes, Jairo & Grohmann, Kleanthes K. 2005. Understanding Minimalism . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, V. V.1990. Istoričeskaja grammatika russkogo jazyka . [A Historical Grammar of Russian] 3rd ed. Moscow: Prosveščenie.Google Scholar
Keine, Stefan. 2010. Case and Agreement from Fringe to Core. A Minimalist Approach . Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerevičienė, Jurgita. 2008. The Lithuanian Dative and its English Counterparts (A Case Study in Cognitive Grammar). Doctoral Dissertation, Vilnius University.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2006. Severing the distribution of pro from case. Syntax 9(2), 153–170. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lunt, Horace G. 2001. Old Church Slavonic Grammar . 7th edn. rev. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matushansky, Ora. 2008. A case study of predication. In Studies in Formal Slavic Linguistics. Contributions from Formal Description of Slavic Languages 6.5. , Frank Marušič & Rok Žaucer (eds), 213–239. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 2010. Russian predicate case, encore. In Formal Studies in Slavic Linguistics, Proceedings of FDSL 7.5 ., Gerhild Zybatow, Philip Dudchuk, Serge Minor & Ekaterina Pshehotskaya (eds), 117–135. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
McCreight Young, Katherine. 1988. Multiple Case Assignments. PhD Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
McFadden, Thomas. 2004. The Position of Morphological Case in the Derivation: A Study on the Syntax-Morphology Interface. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania. ‹[URL]›
. 2010. Structural case, locality and cyclicity. In Explorations of Phase Theory: Features and Arguments , Kleanthes K. Grohmann (ed), 107–130. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Merchant, Jason. 2006. Polyvalent case, geometric hierarchies, and split ergativity. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society , Jacqueline Bunting (ed), 47–67. Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Nau, Nicole. 2011. A Short Grammar of Latgalian . München & Newcastle: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Preminger, Omer. 2011. Agreement as a Fallible Operation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT. ‹[URL]›
Richards, Norvin. 2007. Lardil “case stacking” and the structural/inherent case distinction. Ms. ‹[URL]›
. 2013. Lardil “case stacking” and the timing of case assignment. Syntax 61(1), 42–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of Grammar , Liliane Haegeman (ed), 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Round, Erich R. 2010. Kayardild Morphology, Phonology and Morphosyntax. PhD Dissertation, Yale University. [URL]
Sawicki, Lea. 1992. Genitive and dative in goal and purpose expressions in contemporary Lithuanian. Linguistica Baltica 1, 93–101.Google Scholar
Schmalstieg, William R. 1987. A Lithuanian Historical Syntax . Columbus, OH: Slavica.Google Scholar
Schmidtke-Bode, Karsten. 2009. A Typology of Purpose Clauses . Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Steenwijk, Han. 2003. The use of the supine in Lower Sorbian. In Dutch Contributions to the Thirteenth International Congress of Slavists. Linguistics [ Studies in Slavic and General Linguistics 30], Jos Schaeken, Peter Houtzagers & Janneke Kalsbeek (eds), 331–342.
Stowell, Tim. 1981. Origins of Phrase Structure. PhD Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna. 2006. Strong vs. weak islands. In The Blackwell Companion to Syntax Vol. 4, Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds), 479–532. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vaillant, André. 1966. Grammaire comparée des langues slaves. Tome III. Le verbe . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Vaillant, André. 1977. Grammaire comparée des langues slaves. Tome V. La syntaxe . Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Woolford, Ellen. 2006. Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37(1), 111–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zinkevičius, Zigmas. 1966. Lietuvių dialektologija. Lyginamoji tarmių fonetika ir morfologija [Lithuanian Dialectology: Comparative Phonetics and Morphology of the Dialects]. Vilnius: Mintis.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Arkadiev, Peter M.
2016. Long-distance Genitive of Negation in Lithuanian. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo
Holvoet, Axel & Nicole Nau
2016. Introduction. In Argument Realization in Baltic [Valency, Argument Realization and Grammatical Relations in Baltic, 3], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.