The Direct Object Marker in Romanian: A Historical Perspective

Virginia Hill

19 citations0/0 files storedAustralian Journal of Linguistics

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation Linguistics and language evolution Historical Linguistics and Language Studies

Abstract

So far, most analyses assume that DOM and clitic doubling (CD) are two sides of the same mechanism, arising from a structure-dependent condition (i.e. Case for nouns). This assumption concerns Romance languages in general, including Romanian (old or modern). This paper points out that data from Early Modern Romanian (EMR) and data from other Balkan Romance languages contradict this assumption. The analysis I propose disengages DOM from CD and from structure-dependent constraints, and brings evidence for a discourse-based approach to both DOM and CD, separately or in conjunction with each other.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

References

1997The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery 1994Information Structure and Sentence Form 1999Information structure and sentence form 1976French Syntax: The Transformational Cycle 2007Types of Topics in German and Italian 1989Facets of Romance past participle agreement 1985Empirische Universalienforschung: Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen 2006Balkan Sprachbund Morpho-Syntactic Features

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.