Abstract
This paper presents a framework which connects case assignment with the semantics of argument realization. Broad notions of agency and affectedness are decomposed into more fine-grained semantic properties, loosely based on Dowty’s Proto-Role theory, but conceived in terms of privative opposition and organized into a lattice. This lattice provides a semantic space of participant properties and supports defining hierarchical relations among participant types, interpreted as semantic prominence, as well as topological relations such as ‘closeness’, interpreted as semantic similarity between participant types. Cases are defined as connected regions of this space, relating a given case to a structured set of semantic properties. A case system is represented as a semantic system, which embodies oppositions and contrasts, and operates against the backdrop of the general semantics of argument realization, where one can define notions such as maximal agents and maximal patients and represent generalizations from the research on transitivity. Core case markers (e.g. ergative, accusative) are represented as subspaces of the lattice spreading outwards from the maximal agent and maximal patient nodes of the lattice. Case alternations arise when the subspace of the lattice delimited by a predicate’s entailments for an argument is partitioned by different cases, exemplified with the genitive/accusative alternation in Russian occurring with direct objects of certain intensional predicates. This method also provides a treatment of case polysemy, viz. a single case subsuming multiple uses, by relating the diverse uses at the more abstract semantic level of the case’s region on the lattice, demonstrated with non-canonical uses of the dative.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aissen J. (2003) Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21: 435–483
Arkadiev, P. (2009). Differential argument marking in two-term case systems and its implications for the general theory of case marking. In Differential subject marking. New York: Springer.
Babby L. (1980) Existential sentences and negation in Russian. Ann Arbor, MI, Karoma Publishers
Ball, D. (2009). Clause structure and argument realization in Tongan. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University.
Blake B. (2001) Case (2nd edn). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Blume K. (1998) A contrastive analysis of interaction verbs with dative complements. Linguistics 36(2): 253–280
Bossong G. (2006) Le marquage différentiel de l’objet dans les langues d’Europe. In: Feuillet J. (eds) Actance et valence dans les langues de l’Europe. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp 193–258
Butt M. (2006) The dative/ergative connection. In: Bonami O., Hofherr P.C. (eds) Empirical issues in syntax and semantics 6. Academic Press, New York
Comrie B. (1989) Language universals and linguistic typology (2nd edn). University of Chicago Press, Chicago
Cruse D. (1973) Some thoughts on agentivity. Journal of Linguistics 9: 11–23
Davis A.R. (2001) Linking by types in the hierarchical lexicon. CSLI Publications, Stanford
Davis A., Koenig J.P. (2000) Linking as constraints on word classes in a hierarchical lexicon. Language 76: 56–91
Dowty D. (1991) Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619
Fillmore C. (1968) The case for case. In: Bach E., Harms R.T. (eds) Universals in linguistic theory. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
Ganenkov D. (2007) Experiencer coding in Nakh-Daghestanian. In: Kulikov A., Malchukov L., de Swart P. (eds) Case, valency and transitivity. John Benjamins, Amsterdam
Grimm, S. (2005). The lattice of case and agentivity. Master’s thesis, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Grimm, S. (2007). The bounds of subjecthood: Evidence from instruments. In Proceedings of Berkeley Linguistics Society 33. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Haspelmath, M. (2003). The geometry of grammatical meaning: Semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The new psychology of language (Vol. 2, pp. 211–242). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Haspelmath M. (2005) Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery 3: 1–21
Hopper P.J., Thompson S.A. (1980) Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 56: 251–299
Ioup G. (1977) Specificity and the interpretation of quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 1: 233–245
Jakobson R. (1936) Contribution to the general theory of case: General meanings of the Russian cases. In: Waugh L.R. (eds) Russian and Slavic grammar: Studies 1931–1981. Mouton, Berlin, pp 59–103
Kagan, O. (2007). Property-denoting NPs and non-canonical genitive case. In Proceedings of Semantic and Linguistic Theory 17. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.
Karttunen L. (1976) Discourse referents. In: McCawley J. (eds) Syntax and semantics 7: Notes from the linguistic underground. Academic Press, New York, pp 363–385
Kearns K. (2000) Semantics. Macmillan Press, London
Kittilä, S. (2002). Transitivity: Towards a comprehensive typology. Ph.D. thesis, University of Turku.
Levin B., Rappaport Hovav M. (2005) Argument realization. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Mahootian S. (1997) Persian. Routledge, London
Malchukov A.L. (2005) Case pattern splits, verb types, and construction competition. In: Amberber M., de Hoop H. (eds) Competition and variation in natural languages: The case for case. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 73–117
Maling J. (2001) Dative: The heterogeneity of the mapping among morphological case, grammatical functions, and thematic roles. Lingua 111: 419–464
McFadden, T. (2004). The position of morphological case in the derivation: A study on the syntaxmorphology interface. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
Næss Å. (2007) Prototypical transitivity. John Benjamins, Amsterdam
Neidle C. (1988) The role of case in Russian syntax. Reidel, Dordrecht
Partee B.H., Borschev V. (2002) Genitive of negation and scope of negation in Russian existential sentences. In: Toman J. (eds) Annual workshop on formal approaches to Slavic linguistics: The second Ann Arbor meeting 2001 (FASL 10). Michigan Slavic Publications, Ann Arbor, MI
Pesetsky, D. (1982). Paths and categories. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.
Pinker S. (1989) Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Piñon C. (2007) Verbs of creation. In: Dölling J., Heyde-Zybatow T., Schäfer M. (eds) Event structures in linguistic form and interpretation. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin
Primus B. (1999) Cases and thematic roles: Ergative, accusative and active. Tübingen, Niemeyer
Ramsay A. (1992) Presuppositions and wh-clauses. Journal of Semantics 9: 251–286
Rappaport Hovav M., Levin B. (2008) The English dative alternation: The case for verb sensitivity. Journal of Linguistics 44: 129–167
Rozwadowska B. (1988) Thematic restrictions on derived nominals. In: Wlikins W. (eds) Syntax and semantics 21: Thematic relations. Academic Press, New York, pp 147–165
Schlesinger I. M. (1989) Instruments as agents: On the nature of semantic relations. Journal of Linguistics 25: 189–210
Smyth H.W. (1920) Greek grammar. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
Testelec Y.G. (2007) On two parameters of transitivity. In: Kulikov L., Vater H. (eds) Typology of verbal categories. Tübingen, Niemeyer, pp 29–45
Timberlake A. (2004) A reference grammar of Russian. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Tsunoda T. (1981) Split case-marking in verb types and tense/aspect/mood. Linguistics 19: 389–438
Tsunoda T. (1985) Remarks on transitivity. Journal of Linguistics 21: 385–396
Tuite K., Agha A., Gracyck R. (1985) Agentivity, transitivity and the question of active typology. In: Eilfort W., Kroeber P., Peterson K. (eds) Papers from the parasession on causitives and agentivity at the 21st regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Chicago Linguistics Society, Chicago, pp 252–270
Van Valin R.D. Jr., Wilkins D.P. (1996) The case for “effector”: Case roles, agents, and agency revisited. In: Shibatani M., Thompson S.A. (eds) Grammatical constructions: Their form and meaning. Clarendon Press, Oxford
von Heusinger K. (2008) Verbal semantics and the diachronic development of differential object marking in Spanish. Probus 20: 1–33
von Stechow A. (1999) Temporally opaque arguments in verbs of creation. In: Cecchetto B., Chierchia G. (eds) Festschrift per Andrea Bonomi. CSLI Publication, Ithaca, NY
Wierzbicka A. (1981) Case marking and human nature. Australian Journal of Linguistics 1: 43–80
Zimmermann T.E. (1993) On the proper treatment of opacity in certain verbs. Natural Language Semantics 2(1): 149–179
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Grimm, S. Semantics of case. Morphology 21, 515–544 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-010-9176-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-010-9176-z