Nimetamiskonstruktsioonid eesti murretes: murdeerinevused või suuline süntaks?

Lindström, Liina; Pilvik, Maarja-Liisa; Plado, Helen

doi:10.7592/mt2018.70.lindstrom_pilvik_plado

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This division of the dialects into eastern and western instead of northern and southern is, nonetheless, not at all unusual, as recent studies in dialect syntax have attained similar results (see e.g. Lindström et al 2009, Uiboaed 2013, Lindström, Uiboaed & Vihman 2014, Lindström et al 2015, Lindström, Pilvik & Plado 2018.…”

Section: Combined Analysis and Comparison Of The Datasetssupporting

confidence: 75%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Object case variation of the pronoun mis ‘what’ in spontaneous spoken Estonian and Estonian dialects

Pook

2021

ESUKA-JEFUL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Estonian language makes a systematic distinction between total and partial objects on the basis of semantic and syntactic features: total objects occur in nominative or genitive, partial objects in partitive. However, in the case of the interrogative-relative pronoun mis ‘what’, the partitive mida in the expected partial object position can be replaced with the nominative mis. The aim of this paper is to determine which variables significantly affect this object case variation, how the variation differs between contemporary speech and archaic dialects and what might have possibly motivated the development of this variation. This study is based on the data in the Phonetic Corpus of Estonian Spontaneous Speech and the Corpus of Estonian Dialects. The results show that the variation is most affected by verb type, clause type, length of the following word and dialect. It is concluded that there might be multiple motivations behind this variation, mainly language contact (or a lack of it in certain areas), high usage frequency of the pronoun mis and the effect of the standardisation of language. Kokkuvõte. Hanna Pook: Pronoomeni mis käände varieerumine objekti positsioonis spontaanses eesti keeles ja eesti murretes. Eesti keeles eristatakse täis- ja osasihitist mitmete semantiliste ja süntaktilise tunnuste põhjal; täissihitis on nominatiivis või genitiivis, osasihitis partitiivis. Relatiiv-interrogatiivpronoomeni mis puhul võib aga oodatud osasihitise positsioonis asendada partitiivi mida nominatiiviga mis. Selle artikli eesmärk on välja selgitada, millised tunnused mõjutavad oluliselt pronoomeni mis objekti käände varieerumist, kuidas see varieerumine erineb vanemates kohamurretes ja tänapäevases spontaanses kõnes ning mis on selle varieerumise võimalikud põhjused ja mõjurid. Analüüs põhineb eesti keele spontaanse kõne foneetilisel korpusel ja eesti murrete korpusel. Tulemused näitavad, et mis ja mida varieerumist osaobjekti positsioonis mõjutavad kõige enam verbitüüp, lausetüüp, järgneva sõna silpide arv ja murre. On tõenäoline, et pronoomeni mis käände varieerumine on korraga olnud mõjutatud mitmest tegurist, peamiselt keelekontaktidest (või kontaktivähesusest teatud piirkondades), pronoomeni mis suurest kasutussagedusest ja keele standardiseerimisest.

show abstract

Section: Combined Analysis and Comparison Of The Datasetssupporting

confidence: 75%

“…These methods have also been successfully used in other studies of Estonian and dialect syntax (see e.g. Klavan, Pilvik & Uiboaed 2015, Reile 2015, Ruutma et al 2016, Lindström & Uiboaed 2017, Taremaa 2017, Lindström, Pilvik & Plado 2018, Pook 2019, see also Basile & Ivaska 2021, Klavan 2021, and Hint et al 2021.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Object case variation of the pronoun mis ‘what’ in spontaneous spoken Estonian and Estonian dialects

Pook

2021

ESUKA-JEFUL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The use of the indefinite pronoun keegi ‘someone’ in Estonian dialects

Pook

Lindström²

2022

Nord J Linguist

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Estonian indefinite pronouns keegi ‘someone’ and miski ‘something’ are distinguished by being able to refer to animate or inanimate entities, respectively. However, in certain Estonian dialects, keegi is used to refer to inanimate entities as well. The aim of this paper is to describe the functions and use of keegi based on the data in the Corpus of Estonian Dialects. We used statistical analyses to determine which dialects typically use keegi to refer to inanimate entities and which variables (polarity, function, position in the clause, case marking) contribute most to this variation. The results show that there are significant differences between the dialects: keegi is mostly used to refer to inanimate entities in the northern dialects (most frequently in the Western, Mid, and Eastern dialects), but this phenomenon is rare or non-existent in the southern dialects. All of the variables studied contribute to this variation: keegi is most likely to refer to an inanimate being when it is in the partitive case, functions as an object, a partitive subject, or a negative polarity item, and is positioned at the end of a negative clause.

show abstract

Nimetamiskonstruktsioonid eesti murretes: murdeerinevused või suuline süntaks?

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

Object case variation of the pronoun mis ‘what’ in spontaneous spoken Estonian and Estonian dialects

Object case variation of the pronoun mis ‘what’ in spontaneous spoken Estonian and Estonian dialects

The use of the indefinite pronoun keegi ‘someone’ in Estonian dialects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About