[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-290685-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-290685-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","dative-subjects-talk","Dative Subjects - talk","","NWO/DFG workshop talk examining dative subjects from historical and processing perspectives. It frames dative subjects as unstable across grammars yet attested cross-linguistically and as a standard feature of South Asian languages. The talk reviews relational scales (subject, animacy, definiteness) and OT/PIONEER accounts using violable constraints, proposing a hypothesis that experiencers can be interpreted spatially as locative goals or orientationally on a control dimension. A case study of Marathi contrasts patterns across verb classes and tests for subjecthood, including alternations between dative subjects and accusative/dative objects.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/dative-subjects-talk/290685/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/dative-subjects-talk/290685.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Finn","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-17",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",15,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"Why are dative subjects considered difficult or unstable in grammar?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The talk describes dative subjects as an unstable grammatical component, with cross-linguistic variation and references such as “Dative Sickness in Icelandic.” It also notes historical absences, for example lack of evidence for dative subjects in Sanskrit.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How does the talk explain the origin of dative subjects?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It proposes that experiencers can be interpreted either spatially as locatives (goals) or orientationally on a control dimension as participants in action. These interpretations lead to competing preferences that can yield dative subjects or accusative/dative objects.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What does the Marathi case study show?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"It reports that Marathi dative arguments can surface either as subjects or as objects in certain constructions, especially non-volitional transitives. It uses subject tests such as conjunction reduction and prenominal participial relatives, and compares “find” vs “like” verb classes to explain differences in subjecthood behavior.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},290685,1789642360,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":80,"read_time":109,"preview_page_count":4},34359740700684,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/1f400023980c374ae676?_k=1777273430885731487","Dative Subjects  \nMiriam Butt, Scott Grimm and Tafseer Ahmed  \nUniversity of Konstanz 1  \n[miriam.butt@uni-konstanz.de](miriam.butt@uni-konstanz.de) , [sgrimm@science.uva.nl](sgrimm@science.uva.nl) ,  \n[tafseer@gmail.com](tafseer@gmail.com)  \nNWO/DFG Workshop on Optimal Sentence Processing  \nNijmegen, June 2006  \n1 Introduction  \nRelational Scales as in (1) have been identified as important for the realization of arguments.  \n(1) Relational Scale: Subject > Non-Subject  \nAnimacy Scale: Human > Animate > Inanimate  \nDefiniteness Scale: Pronoun > Proper Name > Definite >  \nIndefinite Specific > Nonspecific  \nWithin Optimality Theory (OT), these scales are translated into violable constraints (e.g.,(Aissen 1999, Aissen 2003)), which can be related directly to constraints on processing/production.  \nWithin the PIONEER project, the constraints CASE, PRECEDENCE and PROMINENCE have been proposed (e.g., (Hendriks et al. 2005, Lamers and de Hoop 2005) ) .  \nMost of the work has concentrated on basic agentive (di)transitive constructions, very little has been done for contexts in which dative subjects arise (mainly psych verbs) .  \nPurpose of this talk: examine dative subjects from a historical and processing perspective.  \n1.1 Dative Subjects  \nDative Subjects appear to be a fairly unstable part of a language’s grammar (cf. Dative Sickness in Icelandic) .  \n􀀏 The dative case, that is, the case of the second object of ditransitive “give” verbs, is canonically a case of objects.  \n􀀏 Yet, dative subjects are found crosslinguistically and are a standard part of South Asian languages (Verma and Mohanan 1990) .  \n(2) Use ye xıyal baha-ya Pron.3.Sg.Dat this.Nom idea please-Perf.M.Sg  \n‘This idea pleases him.’ (Urdu)  \n􀀏 But historically, dative subjects did not always exist in South Asian languages: no evidence for dative subjects in Sanskrit has been adduced.  \n1 This research is supported by the DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) via the SFB 471, Project A24 .  \nButt, Grimm, Ahmed: Dative Subjects 2  \n1.2 Questions  \n􀀏 How do Dative Subjects arise?  \n􀀏 Can we involve processing pressures as part of the explanation?  \n􀀏 More particularly, what are the characteristics of the dative subject constructions?  \n1.3 Hypothesis  \nExperiencers can be interpreted both:  \n1. spatially as locatives (goals) on a spatial dimension (see Figure 1,(Butt 2006))  \n2. as participants in an action (orientationally) on a control dimension (see Figure 1,(Butt 2006)), in which case they are neither quite a Proto-Agent or a Proto-Patient.  \n\n| MORE CONTROL\u003Cbr>| PLACE PATH |  |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| \u003Cbr>Ergative Genitive Instrumental Dative Accusative |  | |\n| LESS CONTROL |  |  |\n\nFigure 1: Space and Agency  \nBoth types are compatible with the grammatical role subject (cf. locative inversion,(Bresnan and Kanerva 1989)) .  \nBut pure locatives are only good subjects under certain circumstances (i.e., when focused in the Bantu languages) .  \nThere are two distinct interpretive possibilites:  \na. Given that stimuli are usually not sentient, but experiencers are, a relational comparison on the control axis preferentially identifies experiencers as more prominent than the stimulus and, therefore, often as subjects.  \nb. Given that experiencers undergo some experience, they can be interpreted as more patientlike and therefore are preferentially realized as objects.  \nThese different interpretative possibilities result in conflicting preferences: one set of preferences yields dative subjects, the other accusative/dative objects. Situations are also predicted to arise in which both possibilities are synchronically available.  \nA comparison of data from two closely related South Asian languages, Urdu and Marathi, illustrates the possible patterns.  \n2 Case Study: Marathi  \n􀀏 Joshi (1993) shows that dative arguments in Marathi can be realized either as subject or as objects in certain constructions:  \n1. non-volitional transitives (e.g., find (3) , like (4));  \n2. passives of simple","cbCaioymbcTw7cOs","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaioymbcTw7cOs","pdf",181524,16,"English","# Introduction\n## Dative Subjects\n## Questions\n## Hypothesis\n# Case Study: Marathi\n## Optionality Analysis","[{\"question\":\"Why are dative subjects considered difficult or unstable in grammar?\",\"answer\":\"The talk describes dative subjects as an unstable grammatical component, with cross-linguistic variation and references such as “Dative Sickness in Icelandic.” It also notes historical absences, for example lack of evidence for dative subjects in Sanskrit.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the talk explain the origin of dative subjects?\",\"answer\":\"It proposes that experiencers can be interpreted either spatially as locatives (goals) or orientationally on a control dimension as participants in action. These interpretations lead to competing preferences that can yield dative subjects or accusative/dative objects.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the Marathi case study show?\",\"answer\":\"It reports that Marathi dative arguments can surface either as subjects or as objects in certain constructions, especially non-volitional transitives. It uses subject tests such as conjunction reduction and prenominal participial relatives, and compares “find” vs “like” verb classes to explain differences in subjecthood behavior.\"}]","Dative Subjects - talk | PDF"]