OV Order Research Articles

Postnominal flagging and OV in Sinitic

Abstract Sinitic languages are known for their SVO order and mostly isolating morphology. This study addresses eleven languages of four different areas in Hunan, Yunnan, Sichuan, and Qinghai/Gansu provinces in China that possess SOV order and developed a postnominal flagging system. This study presents a synchronic description as well as a diachronic analysis of the flagging systems in these languages, focusing on typological properties (ergative or secundative alignment) and the role of language contact. The existence of four separate areas with limited mutual contact allows a contrastive approach and inferences on the role of different contact languages (Tibetic, Mongolic, Tujia) or different types of language contact (borrowing of flags, shared grammaticalization). The study argues against OV order and postnominal flagging as defining features of the “Amdo Sprachbund”, showing that these are universally present in all four areas and are better understood as the result of contact between two Eurasian macro areas.

Word order evolves at similar rates in main and subordinate clauses

Abstract In syntactic change, it remains an open issue whether word orders are more conservative or innovative in subordinate clauses compared with main clauses. Using 47 dependency-annotated corpora and Bayesian phylogenetic inference, we explore the evolution of S/V, V/O, and S/O orders across main and subordinate clauses in Indo-European. Our results reveal similar rates of change across clause types, with no evidence for any inherent conservatism of subordinate or main clauses. Our models also support evolutionary biases towards SV, VO, and SO orders, consistent with theories of dependency length minimization that favor verb-medial orders and with theories of a subject preference that favor SO orders. Finally, our results show that while the word order in the proto-language cannot be estimated with any reasonable degree of certainty, the early history of the family was dominated by a moderate preference for SVO orders, with substantial uncertainty between VO and OV orders in both main and subordinate clauses.

VO or OV

AbstractThis article sketches a new analysis of the diachronic development found in many West Germanic languages from a hybrid VO-OV order to a rigid OV or VO order. The discussion departs from the discussions in Struik & Van Kemenade (2020/2022) andStruik & Schoenmakers (to appear)on the diachronic development of English/Dutch, which focus on the role of object shift and information structure. My interpretation of their data will be based on an earlier analysis of the Germanic OV and VO languages in Broekhuis (2008: § 2.4;2011). The main conclusions are the following. First, the change from the historical hybrid VO-OV systems to the rigid OV and VO systems of the present-day languages is due to changing the “setting” [±V‑to‑v] to the more categorical ones [−V-to-v] or [+V-to-v]. Second, the role of object shift in the diachronic development is modest; it is not involved in the development of the OV-languages at all and involves only the (partial) loss of object shift in the VO-languages (contra Struik et al.). Third, the encoding of the information-structuralnew-givendistinction remains constant in that the interpretation of (un)scrambled nominal objects does not change over time (contra Struik & Schoenmakers).

Information structure and OV word order in Old and Middle English: a phase-based approach

This article re-examines the evidence for OV and VO variation and the loss of OV order in historical English, and presents a novel and unified analysis of Old and Middle English word order based on a uniform VO grammar, with leftward scrambling of specific types of objects. This analysis provides an insightful framework for a precise analysis of how OV word orders differ from VO word orders. We show in detail that OV with referential objects involves discourse-given objects. We then present a phase-based analysis from a VO base in which objects undergo feature-driven movement to spec,vP triggered by the information structure of the object. We propose that this analysis also yields a syntactic framework for analysing the derivation of preverbal quantified and negated objects, as well as a natural explanation for the stepwise loss of OV word order.

Who did what to whom, and what did we already know?

Abstract This paper reports on an experimental investigation of what second language (L2) learners and heritage speakers of Russian know about the relationship between word order and information structure in Russian. The participants completed a bimodal acceptability judgment task, rating the acceptability of SVO and OVS word orders in narrow-focus contexts, under neutral prosody. Heritage speakers behaved like the control group of baseline speakers, preferring SVO order in answer to object questions, and OVS order in answer to subject questions. In contrast, L2 learners preferred SVO order regardless of the context. While the heritage speaker group was more proficient than the L2 group, proficiency alone cannot account for differences in performance: specifically, with regard to acceptance of OVS order for subject narrow focus, heritage speakers improved with proficiency, but L2 learners did not. It is proposed that heritage speakers have an advantage in this domain due to early age of acquisition (cf. Montrul, 2008). This finding is consistent with prior literature on narrow focus with heritage speakers of other languages, and suggests that this phenomenon is not particularly vulnerable in heritage languages.

A cluster of changes: Norwegian word order

Among the syntactic changes that can be observed in the transition from Old Norwegian to Modern Norwegian are the following word order changes: loss of OV order, object shift from a VP containing a verb (non-finite verb or any verb in a subordinate clause), preverbal preposition, and topicalization of a bare head. The fact that these changes all seemto occurat the same timeis not accidental. Old Norwegian was arguably a VO language, like Modern Norwegian, but unlike Modern Norwegian, OV order was also possible.It can be shown that it is possible to derive sentences with object shift with a verb in VP, sentences with preverbal prepositions, and with topicalized heads only from an OV structure. Therefore, when the OV order was no longer available, the other three structures could no longer be derived.

Prosody facilitates learning the word order in a new language

One of the prominent ideas developed by Jacques Mehler and his colleagues was that perceptual tuning, present from birth on, enables infants, and language learners in general, to extract regularities from speech input. Here we discuss language learners’' ability to extract basic word order (VO or OV) structure from prosodic regularities in a language. The two are closely related: in phonological phrases of VO languages, the most prominent word is the rightmost one, and in OV languages, it is the leftmost one. In speech, this prominence is realized as extended duration, or as elevated pitch, sometimes combined with changes in intensity. When learning the first (L1) or the second language (L2), exposure to relevant rhythmic structure elicits implicit learning about syntactic structure, including the basic word order. However, it remains unclear whether triggering the learning process requires a certain level of familiarity with the relevant rhythm. It is moreover unknown whether prosodic information can help L2 learners to extract and learn the vocabulary of a new language. We tested Spanish- and Italian-speaking adults' ability to learn words from an artificial language with either non-native OV or native VO word order. The results show that learners used prosodic information to identify the most prominent words in short utterances when the artificial language was similar to the native language, with duration-based prominence in prosody and a VO word order. In contrast, when the artificial language had a non-native prominence marked by pitch alternations and an OV word order, prominent words were learned only after a three-day exposure to the relevant rhythmic structure. Thus, for adult L2 learners, only repeated exposure to the relevant prosody elicited learning new words from an unknown language with non-native prosodic marking, indicating that, with familiarity, prosodic cues can facilitate learning in L2.

Resilient grammars: On VO/OV in Germanic linguistic islands in Northern Italy

In this work we consider some residual cases of OV order in Cimbrian and show that this is due to the interaction between verb movement, a language specific property, and the syntax of bare quantifiers. This has consequences on a general theory on the change of the basic word order, since it shows that the passage from OV to VO can involve different structures in different languages depending on other properties, hence it is not possible to trace a common path in the diachronic change for all languages that have undergone this mutation.

The OVS order in Russian: Where are the O and the V?

abstract: The non-canonical OVS order is Russian is reconsidered and argued to be derived not by a head-final v P- or VP-fronting (as, for example, in Kalin’s (2014) analysis of Hixkaryana), nor by fronting the O into a left-peripheral position. Rather, it is argued that Russian OVS is derived by A movement of the object into Spec-TP. Furthermore, the Fronted VP Scope Freezing diagnostic is used to show that there is no (remnant) verb phrase fronting in the derivation of the Russian OVS. It is also argued that the verb does not raise via Head Movement. It thus follows that the post-verbal position of the S is derived by a rightward movement of the subject to a low adjoined position.

Elicitation of particular grammatical structures in speeches for interpreting research: enhancing ecological validity of experimental research in interpreting

ABSTRACT In many experiments with simultaneous interpreting (SI), researchers use source speeches that are not only written and read aloud, but also pre-recorded, reducing their ecological validity. This study proposes a method to obtain speeches that are suited for experimental research, but with lower levels of input control. It examines the effect of written cues in a PowerPoint presentation with varying constituent orders and varying ratios of explicit verbal input. The study analyses to what extent the cues are capable of eliciting SOV (subject – object – verb) constituent orders in Dutch speakers, a well-known trigger of cognitive load in SI. We focus on two types of subordinate clauses: adverbial and content clauses. The results reveal that the extent to which SOV is elicited in speakers is highest when the (S)OV order is present in the written input. However, other types of input, with lower levels of input control, such as verbless structures, are also seen to elicit to 50% of SOV in speeches.

The superiority effect in Albanian multiple wh-movement structures

This study examines the order of wh-phrases in Albanian multiple wh-questions. Despite SVO and OVS orders, I argue that Albanian wh-movement displays the superiority effect, through a mechanism generating a rightmost highest specifier. OVS order constructions are subject to the haplology effect and word order freezing, showing the presence of a multiple wh-fronting step in the derivation. The study highlights a general observation concerning opacity and the cross-linguistic wh-question environment. Linear order does not reveal hierarchical structure, as a typically leftmost wh-phrase is pronounced rightmost. This rightward wh-movement analysis may explain future findings of languages claimed to not display the superiority effect.

The syntax of focus in Caucasian Urum

Caucasian Urum is an Anatolian variety of Turkish spoken in the Small Caucasus in Georgia, which shows crucial influences from its contact language Russian, especially in the syntax and the lexicon. One result of this language contact is that both OV and VO orders can occur in similar discourse contexts. This paper examines the effect of focus on word order preferences in Caucasian Urum in comparison to its substrate language Turkish and its contact language Russian. The results of the semi-naturalistic speech production study reveal several interesting differences between the three object languages. One major finding is that the position of foci in Urum is far more flexible than in Turkish and Russian, which implies that the change in the Urum word order led to an extension of the information structural possibilities of the language.

Evaluation of the Null Theory of Intra-Sentential Code-Switching: Evidence from Balti/English Code-Switching

The present study attempts to evaluate the empirical adequacy of the Null Theory of intra-sentential code-switching (CS) proposed by Mahootian and Santorin (1996) with evidence from Balti/English CS. The study exploits a naturalistic corpus of Balti/English CS. There are 40 ‘balanced’ Balti/English bilinguals who participated in the corpus. The participants were divided into 6 groups in order to organise the conversation. The recorded data was transcribed in Roman Script. Mahootian (1993) and Mahootian and Santorini (1996) propose that there are no additional grammatical constraints on mixing of two independent grammatical systems and the lexical items being the head of their respective elementary trees determine the placement of their complements in ‘pure’ CS sentences in the same way. However, the analysis of the data reveals that N and V have no role in placement of respective complement projections. The data under examination indicates that the placement of complements does not follow the grammatical requirements of the language which happens to provide N and V. In spite of having an English V serving as the head of VP, object DPs in mixed Balti/English VPs. VPs are placed at pre-head position resulting on OV order. In the same way, the data under examination indicates that complement Post Ps are placed at pre-head position even though the tree is headed by English Ns which require post-head placement of complement PPs. The data provides multiple instances of projections in which the placement of complements violates the grammatical requirements of the language providing lexical head in violation of Mahootian’s proposal. Thus, the naturalistic corpus of Balti/English CS provides multiple instances which demonstrate the empirical inadequacy of the proposals offered by Mahootian (1993) and Mahootian and Santorini (1996).

Focus on Russian Scope: An Experimental Investigation of the Relationship between Quantifier Scope, Prosody, and Information Structure

An experimental investigation of quantifier scope in Russian SVO and OVS sentences, in which the factors of word order, prosody, information structure, and indefinite form are manipulated, shows that native Russian speakers have a preference for surface scope under neutral prosody, though this preference is more pronounced with odin ‘one’ indefinites than with dva ‘two’ indefinites. Furthermore, contrastive focus on the fronted object QP in OVS order is found to facilitate the inverse scope reading, but contrastive focus on the subject in SVO order is not. These findings have implications for the syntactic analysis of noncanonical word order in Russian ( Bailyn 2011 , Slioussar 2013 ) and support the link between contrastive focus and scope reconstruction in Russian ( Ionin 2003 , Neeleman and Titov 2009 ).

On the givenness of OV word order: a (re)examination of OV/VO variation in Old English

OV/VO variation in the history of English has been a long-debated issue. Where earlier approaches were concerned with the grammatical status of the variation (see van Kemenade 1987; Pintzuk 1999 and many others), the debate has shifted more recently to explaining the variation from a pragmatic perspective (see Bech 2001; Taylor & Pintzuk 2012a), focusing on the given-before-new hypothesis (Gundel 1988) and its consequences for OV/VO. While the work by Taylor & Pintzuk (2012a) focuses specifically on the newness of VO orders, the present study is particularly concerned with the givenness of OV word order. It is hypothesized that OV orders are the result of leftward movement from VO orders, triggered by givenness. A corpus study on a database of subclauses with two verbs and a direct object, collected from the YCOE (Tayloret al.2003) corpus, and subsequent multinomial regression analysis within a generalized linear mixed model shows that OV word order is reserved for given objects, while VO objects are much more mixed in terms of information structure. We argue that these results are more in line with an analysis which derives all occurring word orders from a VO base than an analysis which proposes the opposite.

A Contrastive Study of English and Chinese Synthetic Compounds

The current research compares the distributions of OV/VO patterns in English and Chinese synthetic compounds in a quantitative way and attempts to explain the mechanisms of the two patterns of compounds in English and Chinese. Both English and Chinese adopt SVO as their basic word order. However, the interface of syntax and morphology is more clear-cut in English than in Chinese. VO order prevails in English syntax. But VO order must be transformed into OV order in morphology. VO order is quite unproductive in English morphology. Compared with English, the boundary between morphology and syntax is rather vague in Chinese. The formation of Chinese compounds could be explained by the theory of “syntax-as-morphology”, i.e., the VO order of syntax is directly copied by morphology in Chinese. The mechanism of Chinese synthetic compounds provides evidence for the hypothesis of “syntax as morphology”.

The encoding of subjects and objects in Jumjum, a Nilotic OV language

This article shows that in Jumjum, a little-described language belonging to the Southern Burun subbranch of Western Nilotic, subjects and objects are obligatorily cross-referenced in the verb. Only definite patients are coded as objects, while indefinite patients are coded as non-core arguments of antipassive verbs. Jumjum and its sister language Mabaan are morphosyntactically unique among the Western Nilotic languages in three respects. Firstly, the object of a transitive verb always precedes the verb (OV order). Secondly, subjects and objects are always expressed by the inflection of the verb, which thus cross-references subject and object noun phrases. And thirdly, some subject suffixes are deleted before some object suffixes, which gives rise to many cases of segmentally homonymous forms, but these forms are kept phonologically distinct by their tone patterns. The article documents these features by also taking into account the effect of derived verb stems and of tense inflection on the expression of cross-reference. To some extent, the derivational morphemes are expressed by suffixation, but in addition, root-internal alternations play a major role, including alternations in vowel quality, vowel length, and the root-final consonant.

On Berbice Dutch VO status

Berbice Dutch, once the vernacular of the Dutch-owned Berbice and Canje plantation areas of what is now Guyana (South America), is a VO language, even though both its substrate (Ijo, the Kalaḅarị variety in particular) and its superstrate (16th and 17th century Dutch) are taken to be OV (and Verb Second (V2)) languages. Along the lines of Bickerton's Bioprogram hypothesis (Bickerton, 1984, et seq), some universalist analyses have taken Berbice Dutch to be a perfect illustration of OV markedness. Following Kayne's Lexical Correspondence Axiom that states that every language exhibits an underlying VO order and that OV orders are the result of additional object shifts (cf. Kayne, 1994), many scholars have taken OV languages to be syntactically more complex than VO languages. The emergence of Berbice Dutch VO would then be a reflex of a reduction of the complexity of a creole language in comparison to its substrate and superstrate languages (cf. Roberts, 1999).In this article we argue that Kalaḅarị, unlike previous claims, is actually not a V2 language and that therefore the Berbice Dutch substrate language differs from its superstrate in not allowing surface VO structures. This, we subsequently argue, opens up the way to analyze the emergence of Berbice Dutch VO as a result of the interplay between first and second language acquisition. We conclude that VO word orders are actually likely to emerge in the Berbice Dutch contact situation and that, therefore, Berbice Dutch VO status does not constitute evidence in favor of Bickerton's universalism or similar approaches (in line with Mufwene's, 2001 and DeGraff's, 2001, 2003 arguments against creole exceptionalism), nor in favor of an alleged universal VO base order.In short, Berbice Dutch VO may directly result from the fact that Kalaḅarị speakers would not recognize Dutch V2, as their native language lacked it, and that therefore they analyzed SVO orders resulting from V2 as plain VO orders. Children growing up at the plantation would then take this input as evidence for a VO target language. We furthermore argue that such a reanalysis of OV + V2 structures as VO structures by children, both in main and embedded clauses, got facilitated by the existence of so-called VO leakages in 16th and 17th century Dutch (along the lines of Weerman, 1993).

Acquiring Complex Focus-Marking: Finnish 4- to 5-Year-Olds Use Prosody and Word Order in Interaction.

Using a language game to elicit short sentences in various information structural conditions, we found that Finnish 4- to 5-year-olds already exhibit a characteristic interaction between prosody and word order in marking information structure. Providing insights into the acquisition of this complex system of interactions, the production data showed interesting parallels to adult speakers of Finnish on the one hand and to children acquiring other languages on the other hand. Analyzing a total of 571 sentences produced by 16 children, we found that children rarely adjusted input word order, but did systematically avoid marked OVS order in contrastive object focus condition. Focus condition also significantly affected four prosodic parameters, f0, duration, pauses and voice quality. Differing slightly from effects displayed in adult Finnish speech, the children produced larger f0 ranges for words in contrastive focus and smaller ones for unfocused words, varied only the duration of object constituents to be longer in focus and shorter in unfocused condition, inserted more pauses before and after focused constituents and systematically modified their use of non-modal voice quality only in utterances with narrow focus. Crucially, these effects were modulated by word order. In contrast to comparable data from children acquiring Germanic languages, the present findings reflect the more central role of word order and of interactions between word order and prosody in marking information structure in Finnish. Thus, the study highlights the role of the target language in determining linguistic development.

Word order patterns in the Old High German right periphery and their Indo-European origins

I investigate deviations from the OV order in the OHG texts Isidor and Tatian. Abstracting away from cases of verb-second, post-verbal constituents tend to be heavy or focused. OHG thus has a head-final VP with extraposition of NPs and PPs. Likewise, verbal complexes with the order finite before non-finite are derived by Verb (Projection) Raising. Ancient Indo-European languages are also underlyingly OV with evidence for extraposition. This suggests that OHG inherited the head-final VP, extraposition and even V(P)R from Proto-Indo-European. Because extraposition and V(P)R are at the periphery of grammar, the resulting surface orders have not resulted in parametric change to the VP from Proto-Indo-European to present-day German.