The Balkan clitic doubling and its possible Equivalent in German
Teuta AbrashiOne peculiarity of all Indo-European Balkan (Slavic and non-Slavic) languages is object reduplication or clitic doubling. Since the German language does not use reduplication of objects, the aim of this article is to examine the possible equivalent in German to Balkan clitic doubling After researching the literature, two applicants could be considered as potential equivalents: the pronoun es and scrambling. There are two reasons the pronoun es is under consideration: (i) the pronoun es participate in a kind of a duplication construction when used in so called correlate function, and (ii) reduplicated object clitics perform some functions as the expletive pronoun es does. Scrambling came to the attention because some linguists suppose that both object duplication and scrambling are driven by the same information structure mechanisms. This article shows that object reduplication clitics and the correlated pronoun es can be treated as an equivalent to each other but only peripherally, in a few specific uses. While regarding scrambling, in contrast to some linguists, it turned out that object duplication and scrambling have no common features and are not always driven by the same language mechanisms. Scrambling, compared to object reduplication clitics, is allowed even if the object is an existential noun phrase (without an article). Furthermore, there are indications, that scrambling does not always assign the feature [-focus] as claimed and is not always driven by information structure mechanisms as object duplication does.
Die Balkan Objektverdoppelung und ihre mögliche Entsprechung im Deutschen
Teuta AbrashiEine Besonderheit aller indoeuropäischen Balkansprachen ist die Objektverdoppelung. Da die deutsche Sprache keine Objektverdoppelung verwendet, ist es das Ziel dieses Artikels das mögliche Äquivalent im Deutschen zu untersuchen. Nach einer Literaturrecherche stellte sich heraus, dass zwei Bewerber zu berücksichtigen sind: das Pronomen es und Scrambling. Es gibt zwei Gründe, warum das Pronomen ausgewählt wurde: (i) es wird vermutet, dass eine Art der Konstruktionsverdoppelung bei Verwendung des Pronomens es als Korrelat vorliegt, und (ii) die Objektverdoppelungsklitika führen einige Funktionen aus, wie es auch das expletive Pronomen es verrichtet. Man wurde auf Scrambling aufmerksam, weil einige Linguisten vermuten, dass sowohl Objektverdoppelung als auch Scrambling von den gleichen informationsstrukturellen Mechanismen geleitet werden. Die Untersuchung hat gezeigt, dass die Objektverdoppelung in den Balkansprachen und die Konstruktionsverdoppelung mit dem Korrelat-Pronomen es im Deutschen nur peripher oder vielmehr nur unter wenigen spezifischen Verwendungszwecken als äquivalent zueinander behandelt werden können. Im Gegensatz zu einigen Linguisten stellte sich beim Scrambling heraus, dass die Objektverdoppelung und Scrambling über keine gemeinsamen Merkmale verfügen und nicht immer von den gleichen Sprachmechanismen geleitet werden. In diesem Zusammenhang kann Scrambling (im Vergleich zur Objektverdoppelung) auch diejenige Nominalphrasen bzw. Objekte durchführen, die eine existenzielle Nominalphrase (also ohne Artikel) zulassen. Außerdem gibt es Hinweise darauf, dass Scrambling nicht immer (wie es von einigen Linguisten behauptet wird) ein [-Fokus] zuweist und nicht immer von informationsstrukturellen Mechanismen geleitet wird, wie es bei der Objektverdoppelung der Fall ist.
One peculiarity of all Indo-European Balkan languages is object reduplication or clitic doubling; however, the conditions under which it occurs and its usage differs according to language-specific factors. One of the most confusing aspects of usage is the fact that the grammatical, semantic, and pragmatic interpretation of the clitic doubling in a Balkan language is subject to various idiosyncratic constraints that make it difficult, if not impossible, to define its function consistently (for all Balkan languages). This is not the case even within related languages. In Macedonian, for instance, object doubling is nearly fully grammaticalized. It functions merely as case markings or to indicate direct and indirect objects. In Bulgarian however, clitic doubling depends primarily on discourse factors. Interestingly, the linguistic research of this morphological appearance in Balkan languages shows a geographical particularity as well. Object doubling is more grammaticalized in western than in eastern Balkan countries with the following scheme: Macedonian> Albanian> Romanian> Greek> Bulgarian. While on the left (western Balkan) side (of the scheme) are the languages with predominantly grammatical reduplication, on the right (eastern Balkan) side are the languages with free, mainly pragmatic object reduplication. In other words, the dialects vary with almost complete dependence on discourse factors in the east and with relatively complete grammaticalization dialects in the west.
Since the German language does not use reduplication of objects, the aim of this article is to examine possible equivalent in German to Balkan clitic doubling. Consequently, to find (or check) a possible equivalent in German, I selected one Balkan language so that the research methods used in this language can be implemented as a model method in other Balkan languages. In this article, the Albanian (Balkan) language was chosen because it is the language that best expresses both grammatical and discourse-specific features, with a grammaticalized clitic doubling of the indirect object, and a discourse-dependent direct object clitic doubling.
After researching the literature, two applicants can be considered as potential equivalents: the pronoun es and scrambling. There are two reasons the pronoun es is under consideration: (i) the pronoun es participate in a kind of a duplication construction when used in the so called correlate function, and (ii) reduplicated object clitics perform some functions as the expletive pronoun es does. Scrambling came into attention because some linguists suppose that both object duplication and scrambling are driven by the same information structure mechanisms. Due to the seemingly free sequence of arguments in the middle of sentences, the German language is classified as a language with a relatively free-word order. In fact, the sequence of arguments in the midfield is not so free. This sequence is controlled by various factors. Although according to some linguists, how these factors interact and how the sequence regularities determine the midfield has only partially been clarified. The communis opinio is that it is regulated mainly through discourse-dependent factors. This article shows that object reduplication clitics and the correlated pronoun es can be treated as an equivalent to each other but only peripherally, in a few specific uses. Besides other differences, they diverge in their tendency to perform different specific grammatical functions. While regarding scrambling, in contrast to some linguists, it turned out that object duplication and scrambling have not so common features as initially thought. Consequently, they are not always driven by the same language mechanisms to object reduplication clitics. Scrambling is allowed even if the object is an existential noun phrase (without an article). Furthermore, there are indications, that scrambling does not always assign the feature [-focus] as claimed in some research and it is not always driven by information structure mechanisms as object duplication does.
