{"title":"欧亚大陆西部的物体标记:环波罗的海地区溶入更广阔的区域背景中","authors":"Daria Alfimova","doi":"10.1163/19552629-bja10065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Object Marking in Western Eurasia: The Circum-Baltic Area Dissolves into the Broader Areal Background\",\"authors\":\"Daria Alfimova\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/19552629-bja10065\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-bja10065\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/19552629-bja10065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Object Marking in Western Eurasia: The Circum-Baltic Area Dissolves into the Broader Areal Background
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.