LINGUIST List 14.1792

Thu Jun 26 2003

Diss: Syntax/Morphology/Estonian: Hiietam

Editor for this issue: Naomi Fox <foxlinguistlist.org>

Directory

  • katrinhiietam, Definiteness and Grammatical Relations in Estonian

    Message 1: Definiteness and Grammatical Relations in Estonian

     Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 08:13:26 +0000
    From: katrinhiietam <katrinhiietamhotmail.com>
    Subject: Definiteness and Grammatical Relations in Estonian


    Institution: University of Manchester Program: Department of Linguistics Dissertation Status: Completed Degree Date: 2003

    Author: Katrin Hiietam

    Dissertation Title: Definiteness and Grammatical Relations in Estonian

    Linguistic Field: Typology Syntax Morphology

    Subject Language: Estonian (code: EST )

    Dissertation Director 1: Kersti Borjars

    Dissertation Abstract:

    This thesis investigates the expression of definiteness in Estonian, a language traditionally seen as lacking articles. It shows that the semantic concept of definiteness exists in an article-less language and that it can be expressed by various means. These expressions include the use of definite determiners, the use of case marking in grammatical relations and the discourse pragmatic organisation of linguistic material. The above three manifestations of definiteness are respectively connected to the syntactic, morphological and pragmatic level of the language. The study is based on a data set of spoken Estonian, which is complemented by samples of written natural language.

    This thesis takes a functional-typological approach and defines the key terms, such as definiteness marker, subject, object and topic, based on criteria posited cross-linguistically. The cross-linguistic criteria for each of these terms are evaluated to establish whether it would be possible for them to lead to any judgements in relation to Estonian, and from this the valid characteristics relevant for this language are distilled. Following this, the data are analysed using the criteria posited on the above basis for the definite article, and subject, object and topic in Estonian. Then the tree three claims outlined below are made:

    Firstly, despite the absence of a dedicated syntactic marker of definiteness in Estonian it is evident that, based on the data, there is an element that has set off on the path of grammaticalising into a definiteness marker, namely the unstressed adnominal pronoun see.

    Secondly, definiteness can also be expressed morphologically via case marking in grammatical relations. The case that indicates reduced transitivity of the clause and therefore often also indefiniteness of a grammatical relation is the partitive. For subjects, the nominative is the case indicating definiteness and in relation to objects this function is filled either by the accusative or the nominative depending on the syntactic environment. The interaction between case marking and definiteness for the subject and object relations is explained in terms of the modified Transitivity Hypothesis originally posited by Hopper and Thompson (1980).

    Thirdly, at the pragmatic level, definiteness can be expressed via elements that constitute the topic relation in a clause. Due to the flexible word order in Estonian the topic of the discourse cannot be defined syntactically but merely semantically as the constituent indicating 'what the sentence/discourse is about'. The data suggests that the elements that indicate the most prototypical topical entities in Estonian are generally pronouns, most commonly the pronominal see, but also a zero pronoun in the case of the most accessible topics. Overt and covert pronouns are linked to definiteness since they refer to already identifiable information.

    To conclude, the results that are obtained in the thesis indicate that definiteness in Estonian is expressed at three levels of the language. In syntax it is effected by the use of adnominal unstressed see- marking on noun phrases. In morphology it is efected by nominative case marking on subjects and nominative and accusative case marking on objects, which signals identifiability. Finally, at the pragmatic level zero, pronouns or the pronominal see in the topic position refer to maximally identifiable entities.