Case marking strategies in spatial relations Uralic vs. Tungus-Manchu languages

Abstract

The Uralic and Tungus-Manchu languages differentiate the concepts of motion and location in their case encoding strategies. The Dative case is associated with motion in Uralic and, conversely, with location in TungusManchu. In both language families the recipient in give-sentences is encoded with the Dative case. Consequently, the Dative case sets the situation of giving into two different perspectives: motion in Uralic, and location (or possession) in Tungus-Manchu. In the Tungus-Manchu languages, the parameter of the motion boundary is relevant for case marking, whereas this parameter remains implicit or underspecified in Uralic. In both Uralic and Tungus-Manchu, the concepts of motion and transfer can be extended to different metaphorical domains. In Uralic the possibilities of such extension are very wide and include emotional, mental and social domains. Even an “action in favor of the beneficiary” is grammaticized as a class of spatial clauses. The Tungus-Manchu languages employ special cases for motion and transfer in mental domain and a special destinative construction instead.