Ilja A. Seržant | University of Konstanz | Vilnius University
The aim of the paper is to give a semantic description of the independent or bare partitive genitive (IPG) in Lithuanian in rather neutral, functional terms. The IPG is a multi-faceted category that bears on the domains of quantification and (in)definiteness. On its quantificational reading, the IPG encodes an implicit quantifier, arbitrary in its value. I have used the notion of (un)boundedness (re-)introduced in Paul Kiparsky’s (1998) seminal paper on the partitive case in Finnish. NP-internally, the IPG has two main readings: unbounded and bounded reading. The first reading provides the concept of the participant rather than ‘zooming in’ on particular instantiations. It is extremely weak referentially, probably the weakest option available in Lithuanian. This reading is restricted to those verbs in Lithuanian that allow their arguments to be kind-referring NPs (e.g., the subject of the existential to be, or object of to know). On the bounded reading, in turn, the IPG encodes an undetermined but delimited set, the reading is existential and resembles indefinite plurals. The individuals introduced by this reading are stored in the discourse model and may be picked up by anaphoric pronouns in the following discourse. They never constitute primary or foregrounded information of the message, though. Furthermore, I have claimed that the incremental-theme verbs and verbs of transfer in East Lithuanian interact with the IPG-marked object with respect to their aspectual properties. Here only the bounded reading of the IPG is available. This explains the ban on the occurrence of IPG in imperfective contexts in Lithuanian (such as progressive, which has no grammatical marking in Lithuanian, generic and iterated atelics) with incremental-theme verbs, because the imperfective interpretation induces an inherently unbounded event which is not compatible with the bounded reading of the IPG. Both bounded and unbounded values are assumed to be originally two different readings of the same implicit quantifier that have, however, acquired different distributions in the course of time.
2003Differential Object marking: Iconicity vs. Economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 435–448.
Ambrazas, Vytautas
(ed) 2006Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos gramatika. A Grammar of Modern Lithuanian. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas.
Arkadiev, Peter
2011Aspect and Actionality in Lithuanian on a typological background. In Langues baltiques, langues slaves, Daniel Petit, Claire Le Feuvre & Henri Menantaud (eds), 61–92. Paris: CNRS Editions.
Babby, Leonard H.
2001The genitive of negation: a unified analysis. In Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Bloomington Meeting 2000 [Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 9], Steven Franks, Tracy Holloway King & Michael Yadroff (eds), 39–55. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
1994Case. Second Edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Borer, Hagit
2005Some notes on the syntax of quantity. In Aspectual Inquiries [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 62], Paula Kempchinsky & Roumyana Slabakova (eds), 41–68. Dordrecht: Springer.
Borschev, Vladimir, Elena V. Paducheva, Barbara H. Partee, Yakov G. Testelets & Igor Yanovich
2008Russian genitives, non-referentiality, and the property-type hypothesis. In Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Stony Brook meeting [Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 16), Andrei Antonenko, John F. Bailyn & Christina Y. Bethin (eds), 48–67. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publishers.
Bossong, Georg
1998Le marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues d’Europe. In Actance et Valence dans les Language de l’Europe, Jack Feuillet (ed), 193–258. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gryuter.
Carlson, Greg N.
1977A unified analysis of the English bare plural. Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 413–457.
Champollion, Lucas
2010Parts of a whole: Distributivity as a bridge between aspect and measurement. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Comrie, Bernard
1978Ergativity. In Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language, Winfred Lehmann (ed), 329–394. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Corbett, Greville
1994Systems of grammatical number in Slavonic. Slavonic and East European Review 72(2), 201–217. A revised version of: Systems of grammatical number in Slavonic. In Studies in Number and Quantification, David Gil (ed), European Science Foundation Programme in Language Typology: Theme 7, Noun Phrase Structure: Working Paper no. VII/19.
Corbett, Greville
2000Number [Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics]. Cambridge/New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cruse, Alan
2000Meaning in Language. An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dahl, Östen
1981On the definition of the telic-atelic (bounded-unbounded) distinction. In Syntax and Semantics, vol. 14: Tense and Aspect, Philip J. Tedeschi & Annie Zaenen (ed), 79–90. New York: Academic Press.
Dahl, Östen
1984Perfectivity in Slavonic and other languages. In Aspect Bound. A Voyage Into the Realm of Germanic, Slavonic and Finno-Ugrian Aspectology, Casper de Groot & Hannu Tommola (eds), 3–22. Dordrecht/Cinnaminson: Foris Publications.
Declerck, Renaat
1989Boundedness and the Structure of Situations. Leuvense Bijdragen 78, 275–308.
Declerck, Renaat
1991A Comprehensive Descriptive Grammar of English. Tokyo: Kaitakusha.
Depraetere, Ilse
1995On the necessity of distinguishing between (un)boundedness and (a)telicity. Linguistics and Philosophy 18(1), 1–19.
Doetjes, Jenny S.
1997Quantifiers and Selection. On the distribution of quantifying expressions in French, Dutch and English. The Hague: Holland Academic Graphics. ([URL])
Dowty, David
1991Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection, Language 67, 547–619.
Endzelīns, Jānis
1951Latviešu valodas gramatika [Grammar of the Latvian Language]. Riga: Latvijas valsts izdevniecība.
Filip, Hana
1989Aspectual Properties of the AN-Construction in German. In: Tempus — Aspekt — Modus. Die lexikalischen und grammatischen Formen in den germanischen Sprachen [Tense — Aspect — Mood. Lexical and Grammatical Forms in the Germanic Languages] [Linguistische Arbeiten 237], Werner Abraham & Theo Janssen (eds), 259–292. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.
Franks, Steven & James E. Lavine
2006Case and word order in Lithuanian. Journal of Linguistics 42(1), 239–288.
Givón, Talmy
1979On Understanding Grammar. New York: Academic Press.
1991Transitivity and Clause Structure in Polish. Warsaw: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy.
de Hoop, Helen
2003Partitivity. In The Second Glot International State-of-the-Article Book, Lisa Cheng & Rint Sybesma (eds), Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Huumo, Tuomas
2010Nominal aspect, quantity, and time: The case of the Finnish object, Journal of Linguistics 46, 83–125.
Jablonskis, Jonas
1957Rinktiniai raštai. I tomas. Vilnius: Valstybinė grožinės literatūros leidykla.
Kagan, Olga
2005Genitive case: A modal account. In Proceedings of Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics 2, Yehuda Falk (ed).
Kagan, Olga
2012Semantics of Genitive Objects in Russian. A Study of Genitive of Negation and Intensional Genitive Case. Dordrecht/Heidelberg/New York/London: Springer.
Keenan, Edward L. & Denis Paperno
2012Overview. In Handbook of Quantifiers in Natural Language, Edward L. Keenan & Denis Paperno (eds), 941–950. Dordrecht: Springer.
Kiparsky, Paul
1998Partitive case and aspect. In The projection of arguments. Lexical and compositional factors,Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds), 265–307. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
1971Słowiański genetivus po negacij. In: Sesja naukowa międzynarodowej komisji budowy gramatycznej języków słowiańskich, Stanisław Urbańczyk (ed.), 11–14. Wrocław: Ossolineum.
Lestrade, Sander & Helena de Hoop
2011On case and tense: the role of grounding in differential case marking. Unpublished manuscript, Radboud University Nijmegen.
Löbner, Sebastian
1985Natürlichsprachliche Quantoren – Zur Verallgemeinerung des Begriffs der Quantifikation. Studium Linguistik 17/18, 79–113.
Lyons, Christopher
1999Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Markova, Nina
1988Roditel’nyj padež prjamogo objekta v russkom fol’klore Karelii [Direct object genitive in the Russian folklore of Karelia]. Jazyk russkogo fol’klora [The Language of Russian Folklore], E B Artemenko (ed), 96–104. Petrozavodsk: Petrozavodskij gosudarstvennyj universitet.
McNally, Louise
1998Existential sentences without existential quantification, Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 353–392.
Mehlig, Hans Robert
2006Glagol’nyj vid i vtoričnaja gomogenizacija oboznačajemoj situacii: K upotrebleniju delimitativnogo sposoba dejstvija v russkom jazyke [Verbal aspect and secondary homogenization of the situation: On the use of the delimitative aktionsart in Russian]. In Semantika i Struktura slavjanskogo vida 4 [Semantics and Structure of Slavic Aspect 4], Volkmar Lehmann (ed), 235–276. München: Sagner.
Metslang, Helle
2001On the developments of the Estonian aspect. In: Circum-Baltic Languages vol. 2: Grammar and Typology, Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds.), 443–479. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Neidle, Carol
1988The Role of Case in Russian Syntax. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Paducheva
1997: Padučeva, Elena V. 1997 Roditel’nyj sub”ekta v otricatel’nom predloženii: sintaksis ili semantika? [Subject Genitive of Subject in a negated sentence: syntax or semantics?]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 2, 101–116.
Paducheva, Elena V.
1998On non-compatibility of Partitive and Imperfective in Russian. Theoretical Linguistics 24(1), 73–82.
Paducheva
2005: Padučeva, Elena V. 2005 Ešče raz o genitive sub”ekta pri otricanii [Once again about the subject genitive with negation]. Voprosy Jazykoznanija 5, 84–99.
Partee, Barbara H.
1986Noun phrase interpretation and type shifting principles. In Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalised quantifiers, Jeroen Groenendijk, Dick de Jongh & Martin Stokhof (eds.), 115–143. Dordrecht: Foris.
Partee, Barbara H.
1995Quantificational Structures and Compositionality. In Quantification in Natural Languages, Emmon Bach, Eloise Jelinek, Angelika Kratzer & Barbara H. Partee (eds), 541–601. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pulishers.
2002Genitive of negation and scope of negation in Russian existential sentences. In: Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: the Second Ann Arbor Meeting 2001 [Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 10], Jindrich Toman (ed), 181–200. Ann Arbor: Michigan Slavic Publications.
Partee, Barbara H. & Vladimir Borschev
2004The semantics of Russian genitive of negation: The nature and role of perspectival structure. In: Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 14, Robert B. Young (ed), 212–234. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.
Paykin, Katia
Forthcoming. Russian Partitives and Verbal Aspect. In Partitivity, Silvia Luraghi & Tuomas Huumo (eds). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Pesetsky, David M.
1982Paths and categories. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge.
Quine, Willard van Orman
1960Word and Object. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
Rachilina, Ekaterina V.
(ed) 2008Ob”ektnyj genitiv pri otricanii v russkom jazyke. Moscow: Probel.
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen
2002Recent activity in the theory of aspect: Accomplishments, achievements, or just non-progressive state?Linguistic Typology 6, 199–271.
Seržant, Ilja A.
2012aMorphosyntactic properties of the partitive genitive in the subject position in Ancient Greek. Indogermanische Forschungen 117, 187–204.
Seržant, Ilja A.
2012bPragmatics and Semantics of the bare Partitive Genitive in Ancient Greek. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 65(2), 113–136.
Seržant, Ilja A.
Forthcoming-a. Independent partitive genitive in Russian and North Russian. To appear in Contemporary approaches to dialectology: The area of North, Northwest Russian and Belarusian vernaculars [Slavica Bergensia 13], Ilja A. Seržant & Björn Wiemer (eds). Bergen: University of Bergen.
Seržant, Ilja A.
Forthcoming-b. Independent partitive as a Circum-Baltic isogloss.
Forthcoming paper
.
Smith, Carlotta
1997The Parameter of Aspect. 2nd edition. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Tatevosov, Sergei & Mikhail Ivanov
2009Event structure of non-culminating accomplishments. In Cross-linguistic Semantics of Tense, Aspect and Modality, Lotte Hogeweg, Helen de Hoop & Andrej Malchukov (eds), 83–130. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Tenny, Carol
1994Aspectual Roles and the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Timberlake, Alan
2004A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ([URL])
Traugott, Elisabeth
2003Constructions in Grammaticalization. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Brian Joseph & Richard Janda (eds), 624–646. Malden Mass.: Blackwell.
Vendler, Zeno
1957[1967]Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
Verkuyl, Henk J.
1972On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel.
van Geenhoven, Veerle & Louise McNally
2005On the property analysis of opaque complements, Lingua 115(6), 885–914.
Zimmermann, Thomas Ede
1993On the proper treatment of opacity in certain verbs. Natural Language Semantics 1(2), 149–179.
2020. Contact-induced change in the languages of Europe: The rise and development of partitive cases and determiners in Finnic and Basque. Linguistics 58:3 ► pp. 869 ff.
2024. The dual face of structural object case: on Lithuanian genitive of negation. Journal of Linguistics 60:1 ► pp. 161 ff.
Stevens-Guille, Symon Jory
2023. Decomposing Events into GOLOG. In Logic and Algorithms in Computational Linguistics 2021 (LACompLing2021) [Studies in Computational Intelligence, 1081], ► pp. 151 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 april 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.