Object Marking in Western Eurasia

Abstract This paper investigates object marking strategies in Circum-Baltic languages and beyond, using a sample of 103 predicates from 30 Western Eurasian languages from the BivalTyp database. The study aims to identify areal clusters in object marking and evaluate the relevance of the Circum-Baltic linguistic area in this context. It finds that while most Circum-Baltic languages dissolve into larger, genealogy-driven clusters, areal signals are present, particularly with Lithuanian merging with Slavic languages due to genitive-taking predicates. German deviates from the larger Germanic cluster, merging with Latvian and Hungarian without a specific marking strategy driving this alignment. The results suggest that the concept of a linguistic area is less effective for describing object marking relationships around the Baltic Sea, in contrast to the Balkan linguistic area, where cross-linguistic clusters of object marking strategies do align with the linguistic area. Additionally, the paper discusses large-scale trends, such as comitativity prominence and the comparison of observed object marking strategy distributions with the predicted Zipf distribution.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Language Contact
Published
2024-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-bja10065
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.56
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Object Marking in Western Eurasia

Daria Alfimova
2 citations
Journal of Language Contact
Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
5.56
article

Object Marking in Western Eurasia

Daria Alfimova
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract This paper investigates object marking strategies in Circum-Baltic languages and beyond, using a sample of 103 predicates from 30 Western Eurasian languages from the BivalTyp database. The study aims to identify areal clusters in object marking and evaluate the relevance of the Circum-Baltic linguistic area in this context. It finds that while most Circum-Baltic languages dissolve into larger, genealogy-driven clusters, areal signals are present, particularly with Lithuanian merging with Slavic languages due to genitive-taking predicates. German deviates from the larger Germanic cluster, merging with Latvian and Hungarian without a specific marking strategy driving this alignment. The results suggest that the concept of a linguistic area is less effective for describing object marking relationships around the Baltic Sea, in contrast to the Balkan linguistic area, where cross-linguistic clusters of object marking strategies do align with the linguistic area. Additionally, the paper discusses large-scale trends, such as comitativity prominence and the comparison of observed object marking strategy distributions with the predicted Zipf distribution.

Journal of Language ContactVol. 17(2)
University of Potsdam (DE)
Life below water
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Linguistics, Language Diversity, and Identity
5.56
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.