Startseite Infinitival clauses with dative subjects: goal-oriented directedness in space and time
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Infinitival clauses with dative subjects: goal-oriented directedness in space and time

  • Egor Tsedryk ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 28. November 2023

Abstract

Infinitival clauses are known to represent a caseless domain for the subject. Nevertheless, Russian is often cited as an exception to this property. It has a so-called “dative-infinitive construction” (DIC), in which an overt subject appears in dative case. Dative morphology also appears in certain control environments, resurfacing on a semi-predicate, which has been taken as evidence of case presence on PRO. This paper scrutinizes various types of DIC and proposes their unified analysis, relying on two theoretical tools: the framework of Distributed Morphology and the Universal Spine Hypothesis. Examining the building blocks of the infinitival clause in Russian, this paper argues against a covert-modal hypothesis. The dative case is attributed to a to-like functional head, Goal, which anchors the infinitival clause to a contextually salient point in time or a world of evaluation. Within the clausal spine, GoalP can either immediately dominate VoiceP or be immediately dominated by CP. The proposed analysis builds upon the concept of “goal-oriented directedness”, borrowed from the cognitive-functionalist literature and formalized in a generative perspective. Application of this analysis to control environments leads to a conclusion that two types of infinitival domains should be differentiated in Russian: full-fledged (GoalP-containing) CPs and bare infinitival phrases.


Corresponding author: Egor Tsedryk, Department of Languages and Cultures, Saint Mary’s University, 923 Robie Street, Halifax B3H 3C3, NS, Canada, E-mail:
I would like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments.

References

Antonyuk, Svitlana. 2020. The puzzle of Russian ditransitives. In Anna Pineda & Jaume Mateu (eds.), Dative constructions in Romance and beyond, 43–74. Berlin: Language Science Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Arregui, Ana, María Luisa Rivero & Andrés Salanova. 2014. Cross-linguistic variability in imperfectivity. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 32(2). 307–362.10.1007/s11049-013-9226-4Suche in Google Scholar

Babby, Leonard. 1998. Subject control as direct predication: Evidence from Russian. In Željko Bošković, Steven Franks & William Snyder (eds.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 6, 17–37. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Babby, Leonard. 2009. The syntax of argument structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511576584Suche in Google Scholar

Bailyn, John. 2012. The syntax of Russian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Baker, Mark. 1985. The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation. Linguistic Inquiry 16(3). 373–415.Suche in Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh. 2006. Covert modality in non-finite contexts. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197341Suche in Google Scholar

Biskup, Peter. 2019. Prepositions, case and verbal prefixes: The case of Slavic. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.255Suche in Google Scholar

Boneh, Nora & Léa Nash. 2017. The syntax and semantics of dative DPs in Russian ditransitives. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 35(4). 899–953.10.1007/s11049-017-9360-5Suche in Google Scholar

Borik, Olga. 2006. Aspect and reference time. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199291298.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Burukina, Irina. 2020. Mandative verbs and deontic modals in Russian: Between obligatory control and overt embedded subjects. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 5(1). 1–37.10.5334/gjgl.905Suche in Google Scholar

Champollion, Lucas. 2017. Parts of a whole: Distributivity as a bridge between aspect and measurement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198755128.003.0008Suche in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133–167. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7713.003.0009Suche in Google Scholar

Cipria, Alicia & Craige Roberts. 2000. Spanish imperfecto and pretérito: Truth conditions and aktionsart effects in a situation semantics. Natural Language Semantics 8(4). 297–347.10.1023/A:1011202000582Suche in Google Scholar

Comrie, Bernard. 1974. The second dative: A transformational approach. In Richard D. Brecht & Catherine V. Chvany (eds.), Slavic transformational syntax, 123–150. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Copley, Bridget. 2008. The plan’s the thing: Deconstructing futurate meanings. Linguistic Inquiry 39(2). 261–274.10.1162/ling.2008.39.2.261Suche in Google Scholar

Copley, Bridget. 2009. The semantics of the future. London & New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203880258Suche in Google Scholar

Dowty, David. 1979. Word meaning and Montague Grammar. Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-9473-7Suche in Google Scholar

Dyakonova, Marina. 2009. A phase-based approach to Russian free word order. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Efremov, Evgenii. 2020. Dative case with infinitives in Russian. In Angelica Hernández & Margaret Emma Butterworth (eds.), Proceedings of the 2020 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association: Canadian Linguistic Association. Available at: https://cla-acl.artsci.utoronto.ca/actes-2020-proceedings/.Suche in Google Scholar

Embick, David & Rolf Noyer. 2001. Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry 32(4). 555–595.10.1162/002438901753373005Suche in Google Scholar

Fleisher, Nicholas. 2006. Russian dative subjects, case, and control. Berkeley: Ms. University of California.Suche in Google Scholar

Fortuin, Egbert. 2001. Polysemy or monosemy: Interpretation of the imperative and the dative-infinitive construction in Russian. Amsterdam: Institute for Logic, Language and Computation dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Fortuin, Egbert. 2007. Modality and aspect: Interaction of constructional meaning and aspectual meaning in the dative-infinitive construction in Russian. Russian Linguistics 31(3). 201–230.10.1007/s11185-007-9015-ySuche in Google Scholar

Franks, Steven. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195089707.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Hacquard, Valentine. 2006. Aspects of modality. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz. 1993. Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Ken Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 111–176. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Haug, Dag Trygve Truslew, Marius Jøhndal & Per Erik Solberg. 2019. An unexpected root clause. Linguistic Inquiry 50. 649–661.10.1162/ling_a_00296Suche in Google Scholar

Israeli, Alina. 2013. Dative-infinitive constructions in Russian: Taxonomy and semantics. In Irina Kor Chaine (ed.), Current studies of Slavic linguistics, 199–224. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/slcs.146.12isrSuche in Google Scholar

Jakobson, Roman. 1962 [1958]. Morfologičeskie nabljudenija nad slavjanskim skloneniem [Morphological observations on Slavic declension]. In Selected writings, vol. 2, 154–183. The Hague: Mouton.Suche in Google Scholar

Jung, Hakyung. 2009. Null prepositional complementizers and the dative of obligation in Russian. In Jodi Reich, Maria Babyonyshev & Daria Kavitskaya (eds.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 17, 64–80. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Jung, Hakyung. 2011. The syntax of the BE-possessive: Parametric variation and surface diversities. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.172Suche in Google Scholar

Kagan, Olga. 2011. The actual world is abnormal: On the semantics of the bylo construction in Russian. Linguistics and Philosophy 34. 57–84.10.1007/s10988-011-9093-6Suche in Google Scholar

Klein, Wolfgang. 1994. Time in language. London & New York: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar

Komar, Eric. 1999. Dative subjects in Russian revisited: Are all datives created equal? In Katarzyna Dziwirek, Herbert Coats & Cynthia Vakareliyska (eds.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 7, 245–264. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Kondrashova, Natalia. 1994. Agreement and dative subjects in Russian. In Sergey Avrutin, Steven Franks & Ljiljana Progovac (eds.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 2, 255–285. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika. 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, 109–137. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5Suche in Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. More structural analogies between pronouns and tenses. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory 8. 92–110.10.3765/salt.v8i0.2808Suche in Google Scholar

Kratzer, Angelika. 2012. Modals and conditionals: New and revised perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199234684.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2008. Two routes of control: Evidence from case transmission in Russian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26. 877–924.10.1007/s11049-008-9054-0Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2015. A two-tiered theory of control. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262028851.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Livitz, Inna. 2012. Modal possessive constructions: Evidence from Russian. Lingua 122. 714–747.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.02.002Suche in Google Scholar

Madariaga, Nerea. 2006. Why semi-predicative items always agree? Journal of Slavic Linguistics 14. 45–78.Suche in Google Scholar

Marantz, Alec. 1984. On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Melnikova, Anna. 2020. The aspectual distribution and modal licensing in Russian infinitival constructions. Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America 5(1). 631–642.10.3765/plsa.v5i1.4716Suche in Google Scholar

Moens, Marc & Mark Steedman. 1988. Temporal ontology and temporal reference. Computational Linguistics 14(2). 15–28.Suche in Google Scholar

Moore, John & David M. Perlmutter. 1999. Case, agreement, and temporal particles in Russian infinitival clauses. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 7(2). 219–246.Suche in Google Scholar

Moore, John & David M. Perlmutter. 2000. What does it take to be a dative subject? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18. 373–416.10.1023/A:1006451714195Suche in Google Scholar

Pekelis, Olga. 2019. Expletives in a null subject language and criteria for expletiveness: Evidence from Russian. Studies in Polish Linguistics 1. 189–205.10.4467/23005920SPL.19.012.10992Suche in Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, Asya. 2006. Negative polarity items in Russian and the bagel problem. In Adam Przepiorkowski & Sue Brown (eds.), Negation in Slavic, 153–178. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers.Suche in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, David. 2013. Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262019729.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Portner, Paul. 2009. Modality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199292424.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Portner, Paul. 2018. Mood. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780199547524.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Pylkkänen, Liina. 2008. Introducing arguments. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262162548.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Richardson, Kylie. 2007. Case and aspect in Slavic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199291960.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Rivero, María Luisa & Ana Arregui. 2012. Building involuntary states in Slavic. In Violeta Demonte & Louise McNally (eds.), Telicity, change, and state: A crosscategorial view of event structure, 300–332. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199693498.003.0012Suche in Google Scholar

Schein, Barry. 1982. Nonfinite complements in Russian. In Alec Marantz & Tim Stowell (eds.), Papers in syntax. (MIT working papers in linguistics 4), 217–243. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Suche in Google Scholar

Schoorlemmer, Maaike. 1993. Dative subjects in Russian. In Jindřich Toman (ed.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 1, 129–172. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Sigurðsson, Halldór. 2002. To be an oblique subject: Russian versus Icelandic. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20. 691–724.10.1023/A:1020445016498Suche in Google Scholar

Šimík, Radek. 2013. The PRO-wh connection in modal existential wh-constructions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 31. 1163–1205.10.1007/s11049-013-9205-9Suche in Google Scholar

Smith, Carlota. 1997 [1991]. The parameter of aspect, 2nd edn. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Suche in Google Scholar

Svenonius, Peter. 2004. Slavic prefixes inside and outside VP. Nordlyd 32(2). 205–253.10.7557/12.68Suche in Google Scholar

Titov, Elena. 2017. The canonical order of Russian objects. Linguistic Inquiry 48(3). 427–457.10.1162/ling_a_00249Suche in Google Scholar

Tsedryk, Egor. 2018. Dative-infinitive constructions in Russian: Are they really biclausal? In Wayles Browne, Miloje Despić, Naomi Enzinna, Simone Harmath-de Lemos, Robin Karlin & Draga Zec (eds.), Proceedings of Annual Workshop on Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, vol. 25, 298–317. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications.Suche in Google Scholar

Tsedryk, Egor. 2020. The modal side of the dative: From predicative possession to possessive modality. In Anna Pineda & Jaume Mateu (eds.), Dative constructions in Romance and beyond, 195–219. Berlin: Language Science Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Wiltschko, Martina. 2014. The universal structure of categories: Towards a formal typology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139833899Suche in Google Scholar

Wurmbrand, Susi. 2001. Infinitives: Restructuring and clause structure. New York, NY: Mouton de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar

Zaičkova, Iržina. 1972. Datel’nyj bespredlozhnyj v sovremennom russkom literaturnom jazyke [Prepositionless dative in modern literary Russian]. Praha: Universita Karlova.Suche in Google Scholar

Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2022-10-10
Accepted: 2023-01-10
Published Online: 2023-11-28
Published in Print: 2023-11-27

© 2023 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 18.10.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/psicl-2022-1066/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen