Syntactic Transitivity in Estonian Language

      
      
Transitivity and Partitivity
in Estonian
25 March 2022
Natalia Vaiss
Tallinn University
&
Institute
of the Estonian
Language
 
THE PRESENTATION AIMS
 
to offer an overview of
syntactic transitivity types
usage of direct objects (partitive-accusative
alternations) in Estonian
 
 
*the morphological genitive/ nominative as the
cases of direct objects named here together as
‘accusative’
APPROACHES TO TRANSITIVITY
 
 
SYNTACTIC (FORMAL)
FUNCTIONAL-SEMANTIC
COMBINATIONS OF SYNTACTIC & SEMANTIC
APPROACHES
(for more details see Kittilä 2010)
 
FUNCTIONAL-SEMANTIC TRANSITIVITY
 
The key issue is the notion of the basic transitive
event
, which involves a volitional and controlling
agent and an affected patient.
That is, if the subject is less agentive and/ or if the
object is less affected, then the transitivity of the
clause is lower.
 
COMPARE
:
o
The man startled me. > The picture startled me.
o
I drank up the milk. > I drank some of the milk. > I like
the milk.
 
PARAMETERS OF TRANSITIVITY
(Hopper & Thompson 1980)
*each parameter suggests a scale according to which clauses can be ranked
 
SYNTACTIC TRANSITIVITY
 
The number and the marking of arguments are
central questions in formal approaches.
Based on the occurrence of direct objects, verbs in
most languages fall into at least three categories
(Dixon & Aikhenvald 2000: 12–13):
1) 
intransitive
 (do not occur with direct objects),
2) 
transitive
 (generally occur with direct objects),
3) 
ambitransitive
 or 
labile
 (with or without a direct
object).
The subtypes of these categories may vary from
language to language.
 
MAIN FEATURES OF TRANSITIVITY
IN ESTONIAN
 
THE REGULARITY OF COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS 
(see Kont
1963, Tamm 2012).
 
THE PRESENCE OF PARALLEL VERB PATTERNS, WITH AND
WITHOUT A DIRECT OBJECT
 (see Rätsep 1978, Metslang 2017)
 
FREQUENT LABILITY 
(see Letuchiy 2013, Kehayov & Vihman 2014)
 
OBJECT OMISSION WITH ALMOST ANY VERB 
but to different
extent depending on a verbal type and context (Metslang 2017).
 
COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS
 
a widespread transitivizing mechanism in Estonian
 
 Lase 
  
mu-l 
  
kohtu-da       oma      kohtumisi
.
    Let.IMP 
 
I-ADE
  
meet-INF        own      meeting.PAR.PL
 
‘Let me meet with people I want/ need to meet’
*Literal translation into English or Russian is not grammatical.
 
 
COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS  (2)
 
 
Poiss
  
sai
 
kukku-da
  
oma
 
kukkumise-d.
 
boy.NOM
 
could
 
fall-INF
  
own
 
falling-ACC.PL
 
‘The boy could fall down as many times as he wanted’
 
Issi, 
 
ma 
 
vist
 
kukku-si-n
 
 pesuresti
  
kõvera-ks.
 
daddy
 
  I
 
probably
 
fall-
pst-1sg
 
laundry_chut.
acc
 
bent-TRA
     ‘Daddy, I think I fell down on the laundry chut, and it bent.’
 
  
Libeda-te-l            tänava-te-l      kukku-s       end        vigase-ks       palju    inimesi.
 
slippery-PL-ADE  street-PL-ADE fall-
pst-3sg 
self.PAR injured-TRA   many   people.PAR.PL
 
‘On slippery streets, many people fell and injured themselves.’
 
COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS  (3)
 
 
Tüdruk             
 
hüppa-s
 
           
 
kõrgus-t / kaugus-t
.
 
girl
.nom.sg 
 
jump-
pst.3sg
 
high _/ long _jump-
par
 
‘The girl was jumping 
/ 
jumped a high / long jump’
 
 
Tüdruk 
  
hüppa-s
 
             
 
 
oma hüpe-t / 
oma hüppe 
     
ära
.
 
girl.
nom.
sg
   
 
jump-
pst.3sg
 
 
own   jump-
par
/.
acc
 
prt
 
‘The girl was jumping 
/ 
jumped her jump’
  
 
Tüdruk             
 
hüppa-s
 
           
 
raamatu
  
lapiku-ks
.
 
girl
.nom.
sg
 
jump-
pst.3sg
 
book.
acc
 
 
flat-
tra
 
‘The girl jumped on the book until it was flat’
 
PARALLEL VERB  PATTERNS,
WITH AND WITHOUT A DIRECT OBJECT
 
 Ta
  
alusta-b 
 
   treening-uid/ treeningu-te-ga
    s/he
.
nom
 
start-
PRS.3SG
     training-
PAR.PL/-PL-COMIT
‘S/he starts training.’
Ta 
  
vaata-b 
 
   merd/ mere-le
 s/he
.
nom
 
look-
PRS.3SG
    sea-
PAR/-ALL
‘S/he looks at the sea .’
 
FREQUENT LABILITY
(for prototypical lability see more Letuchiy 2013)
 
 
! 
There are over 90 labile verbs in Estonian (Kehayov & Vihman
2014), as compared to, for example, over 800 labile verbs in
English (McMillion 2006) and ca 30 labile verbs in Russian
(Letuchiy 2006).
 
 
There are 4 types of prototypical lability in Estonian
(Kehayov & Vihman 2014):
patient-preserving
agent-preserving
reflexive
reciprocal
 
PATIENT-PRESERVING LABILITY
(at least 54 verbs in Estonian)
 
 
a. 
 
Poiss 
 
     
 
pritsi-b 
  
vett.
       boy.NOM 
 
spray-PRS.3SG 
 
water.PAR
 
‘The boy sprays water.’
b. 
 
Vesi 
 
    
 
pritsi-b.
 
water.NOM 
 
spray-PRS.3SG
 
‘The water sprays (out).’
(Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1070)
 
AGENT-PRESERVING LABILITY
 (at least 19 verbs in Estonian)
 
 
a. 
 
Jüri
 
     
 
jaluta-s 
  
koera.
       Jüri.NOM
 
walk-PST.3SG
 
dog.PAR
 
‘Jüri walked the dog.’
b. 
 
Jüri
 
    
 
jaluta-s.
 
Jüri.NOM
 
walk-PST.3SG
 
‘Jüri walked.’
(Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1070-1071)
 
REFLEXIVE LABILITY
 (at least 12 verbs in Estonian)
 
 
a. 
 
Jüri
 
     siruta-s 
  
   käsi.
       Jüri.NOM   stretch-PST.3SG
 
   hand.PAR.PL
 
‘Jüri stretched his hands.’
b. 
 
Jüri
 
     siruta-s
 
               ja     tõusi-s.
 
Jüri.NOM    stretch-PST.3SG  and  stand_up-
PST.3SG
 
‘Jüri stretched and stood up.’
(Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1073)
 
 RECIPROCAL LABILITY
 (at least 8 verbs in Estonian)
 
 
a. 
 
Jüri
 
     
 
kallista-s 
  
Mari-t.
       Jüri.NOM
 
embrace-PST.3SG 
 
Mari-PAR
 
‘Jüri embraced Mari.’
b. 
 
Jüri
 
    
 
ja 
 
Mari 
  
kallista-sid.
 
Jüri.NOM
 
and
 
Mari.NOM
 
embrace-PST.3PL
 
‘Jüri and Mari embraced.’
(Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1073)
 
POLYSEMIC LABILITY 
(see Vaiss
2021)
 
Abielu 
  
lahuta-ti.
marriage.ACC
  
divorce-IPS.PST
‘The marriage was divorced.’
Abielupaar 
  
 lahuta-s.
married_couple.NOM
 
 divorce-PST.3SG
‘A married couple divorced.’
Kirik
 
       
 
lahuta-ti 
  
riigi-st.
church.ACC     
 
separate-IPS.PST
 
state-ELA
‘The church was separated from the state.’
Lahuta-ge 
  
viie-st 
 
kaks.
 subtract-IMP.2PL
 
five-ELA
 
two.ACC
‘Subtract two from five.’
Lahuta-ge 
  
meelt.
 entertain-IMP.2PL
 
mind.PAR
‘Entertain yourself.’
Ta 
  
lahuta-s 
  
käsi.
 s/he.NOM
 
shrug-PST.3SG
 
hand.PAR.PL
‘S/he shrugged.’
 
OBJECT OMISSION
 
(= null objects/ object deletion, or object drop; see Luraghi 2004, Onozuka
2007) is possible with almost any verb but to different extent depending on a
verbal type and context (Metslang 2017).
COMPARE
:
Tütar 
  
söö-b 
  
oma 
  
toa-s.
daughter.NOM
  
eat-PRS.3SG
 
own
  
room-ELA
‘The daughter is eating […] in her room’
Alusta-si-me 
 
nulli-st.
start-PST-1PL
 
null-ELA
‘We started […] from scratch.’ (a fixed expression with an omitted object)
Ta 
  
alusta-b 
 
õpingu-te-ga.
s/he.NOM
 
 
start-PRS.3SG
 
studying-PL-COMIT
‘S/he starts studying.’ (a parallel verb frame pattern with the comitative or an
omitted object)
Põhjustab 
  
küll.
cause-PRS.3SG
  
indeed
(
as the answer to the question 
Does this cause a problem?
  Yes, [this] does
cause [an omitted object: a problem])
 
TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM IN ESTONIAN
(Vaiss 2021)
 
 
1) strictly intransitive verbs
(e.g., 
sulama 
‘melt’, 
nõustuma 
‘agree’, 
tutvuma  
‘get acquanted’, 
loobuma 
‘refuse’, 
ühinema 
‘join’)
 
 
2) generally intransitive verbs 
used transitively with cognate and fake objects
(e.g., 
kukkuma 
‘fall’, 
magama 
‘sleep’, 
jooksma 
‘run’, also 
tantsima? 
‘dance’, 
laulma? 
‘sing’)
 
 
3) prototypically labile 
(e.g.,)
 jalutama 
‘walk’,  
pöörama 
‘turn’, 
rõõmustama 
‘delight’, 
suudlema 
‘kiss’,  &
polysemic labile verbs 
(e.g., 
lahutama 
‘divorce’; ‘separate’, ‘divide’; ‘deduct’, ‘subtract’, also 
mängima? 
‘play’)
 
 
4) transitive verbs used as intransitives with the focus on activity
(e.g., 
sööma 
‘eat’, 
koristama 
‘clean’, 
kirjutama 
‘write’, 
õmblema 
‘sew’, also 
harjutama? 
‘practice’)
 
 
5) generally transitive verbs 
used without a direct object in fixed expressions/ meanings or
parallel verb frame patterns 
(e.g., 
alustama
 ‘start’, 
jätkama 
‘continue’, 
lõpetama 
‘finish’, also 
jooma? 
‘drink’,
nägema? 
‘see’ )
 
 
6) strictly transitive verbs 
used with omitted objects in highly restricted syntactical patterns
(e.g., 
eeldama 
‘assume’, 
sisaldama 
‘contain’, 
põhjustama 
‘cause’, 
moodustama 
‘constitute’, also 
omama? 
‘have’)
 
TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM (2)
 
The hypothesis of continuum summarizes the
previous findings of research on transitivity in
Estonian and it is proved by analysis based on the
2019 Estonian National Corpus.
Based on previous sources, for every group, five
representative verbs have been selected and their
transitivity measure has been controlled by using
Sketch Engine software. For each verb, the first 500
results (using the 
Shuffle 
function) have been
analyzed.
 
TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM (3)
 
The analysis proved that there are verbs in Estonian that match
the groups 1-6 very well. However, there are also verbs that are
in between two or more groups (natural for a continuum).
The most ‘stable’ are categories 1, 2 and 6. We might confirm
that there are indeed two groups of intransitive verbs in
Estonian and also the group of strictly transitive verbs.
The most ‘fuzzy’ is the third group (prototypically labile &
polysemic labile verbs) as polysemy is very common to Estonian
verbs.
Groups 3-5 represent different kinds of ambitransitivity in
Estonian.
Further research may reveal other possible intermediate cases.
 
MÄNGIMA ‘PLAY’ 
as an example of ambitransitivity due to polysemy
 
Patient-preserving lability
:
DJ 
  
   mängi-b 
  
muusika-t.
 
DJ.NOM
 
   play-PRS.3SG
 
music-PAR
 
‘The DJ plays music’
Muusika 
 
    mängi-b
.
 
music.NOM
 
    play-PRS.3SG
 
‘The music is playing’
 
Focus on activity:
   
Lapse-d 
 
mängi-vad 
  
oma 
  
toa-s.
 
child-NOM.PL
 
play-PRS.3SG
 
own
  
room-ELA
 
‘Children play in their room’
 
(Regular) omitted objects:
Viiulimängija/ Näitleja 
 
mängi-b 
  
oskuslikult.
 
violinist.NOM/ actor.NOM
 
play-PRS.3SG
 
skillfully
 
‘A violinist/ An actor plays well/ skillfully’
Jüri
 
       mängis 
 
ründaja-na
  
umbes 
 
3-4
 
aasta-t.
Jüri.NOM    play-PRS.3SG
 
attacker-ESI
 
about
 
three-four
 
year-PAR
 
‘Jüri played as an attacker for about 3-4 years’
 
Groups 1-6 with direct objects among 500 corpus
sentences (Vaiss 2021)
 
Main features of groups 1-6 
(Vaiss 2021)
 
Transitivity in Estonian
 
is realized by partitive or accusative direct objects
Differential object marking:
 
BUT the object case distinguishes  aspect in an affirmative sentence with a
quantitatively bounded object and mostly for  aspect and perfective verbs,
and only to some extent for partitive verbs.
 
*Aspect is also expressed by context, tense, perfective particles or
other bounding elements.
TOTAL/ ACCUSATIVE OBJECT – PERFECTIVE/ BOUNDED EVENT
PARTITIVE OBJECT – IMPERFECTIVE/ UNBOUNDED EVENT
 
imperfective verbs 
express unbounded durative events or
states (e.g. intransitive verbs 
elama
 ‘live’, 
asuma
 ‘be located’,
transitive partitive verbs 
armastama
 ‘love’, 
huvitama
 ‘interest’)
perfective verbs 
express bounded momentous events (e.g.
intransitive verbs 
plahvatama
 ‘explode’, 
lahkuma
 ‘leave’,
transitive perfective verbs 
andestama
 ‘forgive’, 
saavutama
‘achieve’)
imperfective-perfective verbs 
express events that might be
bounded (mostly transitive aspect verbs, e.g. verbs 
ehitama
‘built’, 
kirjutama
 ‘write’, but also some intransitive verbs
kasvama
 ‘grow’, 
vähenema 
‘decrease’)
 
 
Estonian verbs’ aspectual
classification (Metslang 2017)
 
DIRECT OBJECTS IN PARTITIVE
 
In Estonian, as in Finnish (Huumo 2010, Luraghi & Kittilä
2014, Larjavaara 2019), a partitive direct object occurs in
the following cases:
o
1) negation (e.g., 
Ta ei lõpetanud ülesannet
 
S/he did not
finish the task.PAR’),
o
2) indefinitness of an object or its quantity (e.g., 
Ta ostis
juustu 
S/he bought (some) cheese.PAR’),
o
3) imperfective aspect (e.g., 
Ta värvis põrandat 
S/he
colored the floor.PAR’),
o
 4) a partitive verb (e.g., 
Tüdruk aitas sõpra
 
The girl
helped her friend.PAR’),
o
5) some special cases in Estonian grammar (e.g., personal
pronouns (the 1st and 2nd person), a neutral aspect, an
object of an infinitive form etc.) (see Metslang 2017).
 
DIRECT OBJECTS IN PARTITIVE (2)
 
In addition, a partitive direct object may (see Vaiss 2020)
o
1) reflect a distinction in meaning
Vargad röövisid meest 
‘A man.PAR was robbed by
thieves’
Terroristid röövisid mehe
 ‘A man.ACC was kidnapped
by terrorists’
o
2) be a part of an idiomatic phrase
Autojuht pani pidurit 
‘The driver hit the brakes.PAR’,
o
3) depend on the lexical nature of an object phrase
Hotell aktsepteeris minu krediitkaarti 
‘The hotel
accepted my credit card.PART’
Komisjon aktsepteeris ettepanekut/ ettepaneku
‘The commission was accepting the proposal.PAR/ The
commission accepted the proposal.
acc
 
SCALE OF ‘PERFECTIVITY’/‘PARTITIVITY’
OF ESTONIAN VERBS (groups 2-6)
 
‘hard’ partitive verbs
(e.g., 
eelistama
 
prefer’, 
armastama ‘
love’)
 
‘soft’ or ‘weak’ partitive verbs
(e.g., 
lugema
 
read’, 
veeretama ‘
roll’)
 
aspect verbs
(e.g., 
ehitama ‘build
’)
 
perfective verbs
(e.g., 
läbi lugema ‘read through
’, 
leidma ‘find
’)
 
PARTITIVE VERBS
= low transitivity verbs (
Luraghi & Kittilä 2014
)
 
semantically very heterogeneous:
mostly state verbs that express
feelings
 (nt 
armastama 
‘love’, 
vihkama ‘
hate’),
relationships
 (nt 
usaldama 
‘trust’, 
uskuma 
‘believe’),
desire or need 
(nt 
tahtma 
‘want’, 
vajama 
‘need’) etc,
 
but also action verbs like
nägema
 ‘see’, 
kuulama
 ‘listen’, 
katsuma
 ‘touch’, maitsma
‘taste’, vaatama ‘watch’, 
aitama 
‘help’
, alustama 
‘start’,
mängima 
‘play’
, tänama 
‘thank’, 
õnnitlema 
‘congratulate’,
õppima 
‘learn’
,
 
üllatama 
‘suprise’, 
pildistama 
‘take a
photo’, 
tervitama 
‘greet’, 
tutvustama 
‘introduce’ etc
 
PARTITIVE VERBS
 
may also denote perfective events:
Ma 
  
tervita-si-n 
  
naabri-t.
I.
NOM
 
greet-
PST-1SG
 
neighbour-
PAR
‘I was greeting/ greeted the neighbour’
 
are heterogeneous also syntactically:
‘HARD’ and ‘SOFT’ partitive verbs (see Klaas 1999)
 
The scale of partitive verbs
(Tamm & Vaiss 2019: 160)
 
 
‘HARD’ PARTITIVE VERBS (1a)
 
Total objects are not possible
Eelista-n 
  
kange-t 
 
kohvi.
prefer-PRS.1SG
 
strong-PAR 
 
coffee.PAR
‘I prefer strong coffee’
 
 
 
‘HARD’ PARTITIVE VERBS (1b)
 
Total objects are possible only with a perfective
particle (NB! another verb lexeme)
 
tundma 
‘know’ – 
ära tundma 
‘recognize’
ehmatama 
‘frighten’ – 
ära ehmatama 
‘scare away’
(shifted meaning)
 
 
 
 FRAMED ‘SOFT’ OR ‘WEAK’ PARTITIVE VERBS (2a)
 
allow a freely and productively occurring perfectivizing
complement
Mees
  
veereta-s
 
kivi-d
 
        
 
kraavi.
man.NOM
 
roll-PST.3SG   rock-ACC.PL  ditch-ILL
‘The man rolled the rocks into the ditch’
Mees 
 
      aida-ti             diivani-le     puhka-ma.
man.ACC help-IPS.PST   sofa-ALL     rest-MINF
‘The man was helped to the sofa in order to rest.’
Mees
  
ihu-s
  
      noa
 
 terava-ks.
man.NOM
 
sharpen-PST.3SG knife.ACC  sharp-TRA
‘The man sharpened the knife’
 
 
CONTEXTUAL ‘SOFT’ OR ‘WEAK’ PARTITIVE VERBS (2b)
 
require discourse support to occur with a total object
The conditions  are
:
an explicit quantifier  or  qualifier
Tüdruk 
 
   õppi-s 
 
      
 
ühe/ pika            
 
luuletus-e.
girl.NOM
 
   learn-PST.3SG   
 
one/long.ACC 
 
poem-ACC
‘The girl learned one/ a long poem by heart.’
an aim/reason or the source/ origin
Õppi-si-n 
  
emadepäeva-ks/ raamatu-st 
 
sonet-i.
learn-PST-1SG 
 
mother’s_day-TRA /book-ELA
 
sonnet-ACC
‘I learned a sonnet for Mother’s Day/ from the book.’
 
 focus on the object’s identity or contrast
Mina     õppi-si-n            luuletuse    (, sina      
 
sonet-i).
I.NOM  learn-PST-1SG  poem.ACC    you.NOM     
 
 sonnet-ACC
‘I learned a poem by heart (, and you learned a sonnet).’
 
 impersonal constructions
Sonett 
  
õpi-ti.
sonnet.ACC
 
learn-PST.IPS
 ‘A/the sonnet was learned.’
 
In case of aspect and perfective verbs, ACCUSATIVE-
PARTITIVE alternation distinguishes aspect.
Perfective verbs are mostly used with accusative objects,
and very rarely with partitive objects, only if the
imperfective event is highlighted lexically, e.g., 
pidevalt
‘continuously ’, ‘all the time’, 
parajasti
 ‘right now’, or
morfologically, e.g. the 
mas
-infinite form which means that
the event is ongoing at the moment.
 
Jüri kaotab 
pidevalt
 oma spordiriideid.
‘Jüri loses his sportwears.PAR 
all the time 
Jüri on võistlust kaotamas.
‘Jüri is losing the competition.PAR’
 
ASPECT and PERFECTIVE
 
VERBS
 
TO CONCLUDE
 
Partitive objecthood is an integral part of the
Estonian transitivity.
Partitive objects are more frequent in Estonian than
the accusative ones because of the multiple functions
of the partitive.
Semantically, the use of partitive objects refers to
reduced transitivity, as they are usually less affected
by the action as compared to accusative objects.
 
 
 
 
 
THANK YOU!
 
REFERENCES
 
Dixon, Robert M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald 2000. Introduction. – Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity. Ed.
by R. M. W. Dixon, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 9–29.
Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. – Language 62 (2), 251–299.
Huumo, Tuomas 2010. Nominal aspect, quantity, and time: The case of the Finnish object. –  Journal of Linguistics 46 (1),
83–125.
Kehayov, Petar & Virve-Anneli Vihman 2014. The lure of lability: A synchronic and diachronic investigation of the labile
pattern in Estonian. – Linguistics 52 (4), 1061–1105.
Kittilä, Seppo 2010. Transitivity typology. – The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Ed. by J.J. Song. Oxford
University Press, 346–367.
Klaas, B. 1999. 
Dependence of the object case on the semantics of the verb in Estonian, Finnish, and Lithuanian.  
Estonian
Typological Studies III. Edited by Mati Erelt. Tartu ülikooli eesti keele õppetooli toimetised 11. Tartu, 47–83
Kont, Karl 1963. Käändsõnaline objekt läänemeresoome keeltes. [Nominal object in Baltic Finnic languages.] (= Keele ja
Kirjanduse Instituudi uurimused IX.) Tallinn.
Larjavaaara, Matti 2019. Partitiivin valinta. [Choosing of partitive.] Suomalaisen Seura. Helsinki.
Letuchiy 2006 = Александр Б. Летучий 2006. Лабильность в русском языке: случайность или закономерность? [Lability
in Russian: an exception or a rule?] Диалог 2006, Москва, 343–347.
Letuchiy 2013 = Александр Б. Летучий 2013. Типология лабильных глаголов. [Typology of labile verbs.] Москва: Языки
славянской культуры.
Luraghi, Silvia 2004. Null objects in Latin and Greek and the relevance of linguistic typology for language reconstruction. –
Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference. Ed. by Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela
D. Volpe, Mirriam R. Dexter. (= Journal of Indo-European Monograph Series 49.) Washington: Institute for the Study of Man,
235–256.
Luraghi, Silvia & Seppo Kittilä 2014. Typology and diachrony of partitive case markers. – Partitive cases and related
categories. Ed. by Silvia Luraghi, Tuomas Huumo. (= Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 54.) De Gruyter Mouton,
17–62.
McMillion, Alan. 2006. Labile verbs in English: Their meaning, behavior and structure. Stockholm: Stockholm University
dissertation
.
 
Metslang, Helle 2017. Sihitis. [Object.] – Eesti keelesüntaks. Toim. MatiErelt, Helle Metslang. (= Eesti keelevaramu III.)
Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus, 258–277.
Næss, Åshild 2007. Prototypical Transitivity. (= Typological Studies in Language 72.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Onozuka, Hiromi 2007. Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English. – Language Sciences 29 (4), 538–553.
Rätsep, Huno 1978. Eesti keele lihtlausete tüübid. [Types of simple sentences in Estonian.] Tallinn: Valgus.
Tamm, Anne 2012. Scalar Verb Classes: Scalarity, Thematic Roles, and Arguments in the Estonian Aspectual Lexicon.
Firenze: Firenze University Press.
Tamm, Anne & Natalia Vaiss 2019. Setting the boundaries: Partitive verbs in Estonian verb classifications. – Eesti
Rakenduslingvistika Ühinguaastaraamat, 15, 159–181.
Vaiss, Natalia 2020. Kogesin 
vapustust 
või 
vapustuse
? Sihilised verbid valikute ees. [Estonian transitive verbs facing choices.]
– Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühinguaastaraamat, 16, 241–261.
Vaiss, Natalia 2021. Verbide transitiivsuse kontiinumist eesti keeles. [The verbal transitivity continuum in Estonian.] –
Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 66, 344–386.
Slide Note
Embed
Share

This presentation by Natalia Vaiss from Tallinn University delves into the intricate details of syntactic transitivity types and the usage of direct objects, particularly focusing on partitive-accusative alternations in the Estonian language. It explores the morphological aspects of genitive and nominative cases as accusative, and discusses formal and functional-semantic approaches to transitivity. The key concepts of functional-semantic transitivity, parameters of transitivity, and syntactic transitivity are elucidated, shedding light on the nuanced aspects of language structure and usage.

  • Estonian language
  • Syntactic transitivity
  • Natalia Vaiss
  • Tallinn University
  • Linguistics

Uploaded on Sep 25, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Natalia Vaiss Tallinn University & Institute of the Estonian Language Transitivity and Partitivity in Estonian 25 March 2022

  2. THE PRESENTATION AIMS to offer an overview of syntactic transitivity types usage of direct objects (partitive-accusative alternations) in Estonian *the morphological genitive/ nominative as the cases of direct objects named here together as accusative

  3. APPROACHES TO TRANSITIVITY SYNTACTIC (FORMAL) FUNCTIONAL-SEMANTIC COMBINATIONS OF SYNTACTIC & SEMANTIC APPROACHES (for more details see Kittil 2010)

  4. FUNCTIONAL-SEMANTIC TRANSITIVITY The key issue is the notion of the basic transitive event, which involves a volitional and controlling agent and an affected patient. That is, if the subject is less agentive and/ or if the object is less affected, then the transitivity of the clause is lower. COMPARE: o The man startled me. > The picture startled me. o I drank up the milk. > I drank some of the milk. > I like the milk.

  5. PARAMETERS OF TRANSITIVITY (Hopper & Thompson 1980) *each parameter suggests a scale according to which clauses can be ranked HIGH TRANSITIVITY LOW TRANSITIVITY PARTICIPANTS 2 > (A & O) action telic punctual volitional affirmative realis high agency totally affected 1 non-action atelic non-punctional non-volitional negative irrealis low agency not affected KINESIS ASPECT PUNCTUALITY VOLITIONALITY AFFIRMATION MODE AGENCY AFFECTEDNESS OF OBJECT INDIVIDUATION OF OBJECT highly individuated non-individuated

  6. SYNTACTIC TRANSITIVITY The number and the marking of arguments are central questions in formal approaches. Based on the occurrence of direct objects, verbs in most languages fall into at least three categories (Dixon & Aikhenvald 2000: 12 13): 1) intransitive (do not occur with direct objects), 2) transitive (generally occur with direct objects), 3) ambitransitive or labile (with or without a direct object). The subtypes of these categories may vary from language to language.

  7. MAIN FEATURES OF TRANSITIVITY IN ESTONIAN THE REGULARITY OF COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS (see Kont 1963, Tamm 2012). THE PRESENCE OF PARALLEL VERB PATTERNS, WITH AND WITHOUT A DIRECT OBJECT (see R tsep 1978, Metslang 2017) FREQUENT LABILITY (see Letuchiy 2013, Kehayov & Vihman 2014) OBJECT OMISSION WITH ALMOST ANY VERB but to different extent depending on a verbal type and context (Metslang 2017).

  8. COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS a widespread transitivizing mechanism in Estonian Lase mu-l kohtu-da oma kohtumisi. Let.IMP I-ADE meet-INF own meeting.PAR.PL Let me meet with people I want/ need to meet *Literal translation into English or Russian is not grammatical.

  9. COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS (2) Poiss sai kukku-da oma kukkumise-d. boy.NOM could fall-INF own falling-ACC.PL The boy could fall down as many times as he wanted Issi, ma vist kukku-si-n pesuresti k vera-ks. daddy I probably fall-PST-1SG laundry_chut.ACC bent-TRA Daddy, I think I fell down on the laundry chut, and it bent. Libeda-te-l t nava-te-l kukku-s end vigase-ks palju inimesi. slippery-PL-ADE street-PL-ADE fall-PST-3SG self.PAR injured-TRA many people.PAR.PL On slippery streets, many people fell and injured themselves.

  10. COGNATE AND FAKE OBJECTS (3) h ppa-s k rgus-t / kaugus-t. T druk girl.NOM.SG jump-PST.3SG high _/ long _jump-PAR The girl was jumping / jumped a high / long jump h ppa-s oma h pe-t / oma h ppe ra. T druk girl.NOM.sg jump-PST.3SG own jump-PAR/.ACC prt The girl was jumping / jumped her jump h ppa-s raamatu lapiku-ks. T druk girl.NOM.sg jump-PST.3SG book.ACC flat-TRA The girl jumped on the book until it was flat

  11. PARALLEL VERB PATTERNS, WITH AND WITHOUT A DIRECT OBJECT Ta alusta-b treening-uid/ treeningu-te-ga s/he.NOM start-PRS.3SG training-PAR.PL/-PL-COMIT S/he starts training. Ta vaata-b merd/ mere-le s/he.NOM look-PRS.3SG sea-PAR/-ALL S/he looks at the sea .

  12. FREQUENT LABILITY (for prototypical lability see more Letuchiy 2013) ! There are over 90 labile verbs in Estonian (Kehayov & Vihman 2014), as compared to, for example, over 800 labile verbs in English (McMillion 2006) and ca 30 labile verbs in Russian (Letuchiy 2006). There are 4 types of prototypical lability in Estonian (Kehayov & Vihman 2014): patient-preserving agent-preserving reflexive reciprocal

  13. PATIENT-PRESERVING LABILITY (at least 54 verbs in Estonian) a. Poiss boy.NOM The boy sprays water. b. Vesi water.NOM The water sprays (out). (Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1070) pritsi-b spray-PRS.3SG vett. water.PAR pritsi-b. spray-PRS.3SG

  14. AGENT-PRESERVING LABILITY (at least 19 verbs in Estonian) a. J ri jaluta-s walk-PST.3SG koera. dog.PAR J ri.NOM J ri walked the dog. b. J ri J ri.NOM J ri walked. (Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1070-1071) jaluta-s. walk-PST.3SG

  15. REFLEXIVE LABILITY (at least 12 verbs in Estonian) a. J ri siruta-s k si. J ri.NOM stretch-PST.3SG hand.PAR.PL J ri stretched his hands. b. J ri siruta-s J ri.NOM stretch-PST.3SG and stand_up- PST.3SG J ri stretched and stood up. (Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1073) ja t usi-s.

  16. RECIPROCAL LABILITY (at least 8 verbs in Estonian) a. J ri kallista-s embrace-PST.3SG Mari-PAR Mari-t. J ri.NOM J ri embraced Mari. b. J ri J ri.NOM J ri and Mari embraced. (Kehayov & Vihman 2014: 1073) ja and Mari Mari.NOM embrace-PST.3PL kallista-sid.

  17. POLYSEMIC LABILITY (see Vaiss 2021) Abielu marriage.ACC The marriage was divorced. Abielupaar married_couple.NOM A married couple divorced. Kirik church.ACC The church was separated from the state. Lahuta-ge subtract-IMP.2PL Subtract two from five. Lahuta-ge entertain-IMP.2PL Entertain yourself. Ta lahuta-s s/he.NOM shrug-PST.3SG S/he shrugged. lahuta-ti. divorce-IPS.PST lahuta-s. divorce-PST.3SG lahuta-ti separate-IPS.PST riigi-st. state-ELA viie-st five-ELA two.ACC kaks. meelt. mind.PAR k si. hand.PAR.PL

  18. OBJECT OMISSION (= null objects/ object deletion, or object drop; see Luraghi 2004, Onozuka 2007) is possible with almost any verb but to different extent depending on a verbal type and context (Metslang 2017). COMPARE: T tar s -b daughter.NOM eat-PRS.3SG The daughter is eating [ ] in her room Alusta-si-me nulli-st. start-PST-1PL null-ELA We started [ ] from scratch. (a fixed expression with an omitted object) Ta alusta-b pingu-te-ga. s/he.NOM start-PRS.3SG studying-PL-COMIT S/he starts studying. (a parallel verb frame pattern with the comitative or an omitted object) P hjustab k ll. cause-PRS.3SG indeed (as the answer to the question Does this cause a problem? Yes, [this] does cause [an omitted object: a problem]) oma own toa-s. room-ELA

  19. TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM IN ESTONIAN (Vaiss 2021) 1) strictly intransitive verbs (e.g., sulama melt , n ustuma agree , tutvuma get acquanted , loobuma refuse , hinema join ) 2) generally intransitive verbs used transitively with cognate and fake objects (e.g., kukkuma fall , magama sleep , jooksma run , also tantsima? dance , laulma? sing ) 3) prototypically labile (e.g.,) jalutama walk , p rama turn , r mustama delight , suudlema kiss , & polysemic labile verbs (e.g., lahutama divorce ; separate , divide ; deduct , subtract , also m ngima? play ) 4) transitive verbs used as intransitives with the focus on activity (e.g., s ma eat , koristama clean , kirjutama write , mblema sew , also harjutama? practice ) 5) generally transitive verbs used without a direct object in fixed expressions/ meanings or parallel verb frame patterns (e.g., alustama start , j tkama continue , l petama finish , also jooma? drink , n gema? see ) 6) strictly transitive verbs used with omitted objects in highly restricted syntactical patterns (e.g., eeldama assume , sisaldama contain , p hjustama cause , moodustama constitute , also omama? have )

  20. TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM (2) The hypothesis of continuum summarizes the previous findings of research on transitivity in Estonian and it is proved by analysis based on the 2019 Estonian National Corpus. Based on previous sources, for every group, five representative verbs have been selected and their transitivity measure has been controlled by using Sketch Engine software. For each verb, the first 500 results (using the Shuffle function) have been analyzed.

  21. TRANSITIVITY CONTINUUM (3) The analysis proved that there are verbs in Estonian that match the groups 1-6 very well. However, there are also verbs that are in between two or more groups (natural for a continuum). The most stable are categories 1, 2 and 6. We might confirm that there are indeed two groups of intransitive verbs in Estonian and also the group of strictly transitive verbs. The most fuzzy is the third group (prototypically labile & polysemic labile verbs) as polysemy is very common to Estonian verbs. Groups 3-5 represent different kinds of ambitransitivity in Estonian. Further research may reveal other possible intermediate cases.

  22. MNGIMA PLAY as an example of ambitransitivity due to polysemy Patient-preserving lability: DJ DJ.NOM The DJ plays music m ngi-b play-PRS.3SG muusika-t. music-PAR Muusika music.NOM The music is playing m ngi-b. play-PRS.3SG Focus on activity: Lapse-d child-NOM.PL Children play in their room m ngi-vad play-PRS.3SG oma own toa-s. room-ELA (Regular) omitted objects: Viiulim ngija/ N itleja violinist.NOM/ actor.NOM A violinist/ An actor plays well/ skillfully m ngi-b play-PRS.3SG oskuslikult. skillfully J ri J ri.NOM play-PRS.3SG J ri played as an attacker for about 3-4 years m ngis r ndaja-na attacker-ESI umbes about 3-4 three-four year-PAR aasta-t.

  23. Groups 1-6 with direct objects among 500 corpus sentences (Vaiss 2021) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Occured with a direct object among 500 corpus sentences 0 1-35 3-83 57-71 57-87 97-100

  24. Main features of groups 1-6 (Vaiss 2021) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Cognate and fake objects - ++ + + + - Definite object omission - + + + ++ + Indefinite object omission - - + ++ + + Verb pattern without a direct object ++ - + + ++ - Verbal polysemy - + ++ + + + Highly agentive subject + ++ + + + + - does not occur, + occurs, ++ occurs regularly

  25. Transitivity in Estonian is realized by partitive or accusative direct objects Differential object marking: TOTAL/ ACCUSATIVE OBJECT PERFECTIVE/ BOUNDED EVENT PARTITIVE OBJECT IMPERFECTIVE/ UNBOUNDED EVENT BUT the object case distinguishes aspect in an affirmative sentence with a quantitatively bounded object and mostly for aspect and perfective verbs, and only to some extent for partitive verbs. *Aspect is also expressed by context, tense, perfective particles or other bounding elements.

  26. Estonian verbs aspectual classification (Metslang 2017) imperfective verbs express unbounded durative events or states (e.g. intransitive verbs elama live , asuma be located , transitive partitive verbs armastama love , huvitama interest ) perfective verbs express bounded momentous events (e.g. intransitive verbs plahvatama explode , lahkuma leave , transitive perfective verbs andestama forgive , saavutama achieve ) imperfective-perfective verbs express events that might be bounded (mostly transitive aspect verbs, e.g. verbs ehitama built , kirjutama write , but also some intransitive verbs kasvama grow , v henema decrease )

  27. DIRECT OBJECTS IN PARTITIVE In Estonian, as in Finnish (Huumo 2010, Luraghi & Kittil 2014, Larjavaara 2019), a partitive direct object occurs in the following cases: o 1) negation (e.g., Ta ei l petanud lesannet S/he did not finish the task.PAR ), o 2) indefinitness of an object or its quantity (e.g., Ta ostis juustu S/he bought (some) cheese.PAR ), o 3) imperfective aspect (e.g., Ta v rvis p randat S/he colored the floor.PAR ), o 4) a partitive verb (e.g., T druk aitas s pra The girl helped her friend.PAR ), o 5) some special cases in Estonian grammar (e.g., personal pronouns (the 1st and 2nd person), a neutral aspect, an object of an infinitive form etc.) (see Metslang 2017).

  28. DIRECT OBJECTS IN PARTITIVE (2) In addition, a partitive direct object may (see Vaiss 2020) o 1) reflect a distinction in meaning Vargad r visid meest A man.PAR was robbed by thieves Terroristid r visid mehe A man.ACC was kidnapped by terrorists o 2) be a part of an idiomatic phrase Autojuht pani pidurit The driver hit the brakes.PAR , o 3) depend on the lexical nature of an object phrase Hotell aktsepteeris minu krediitkaarti The hotel accepted my credit card.PART Komisjon aktsepteeris ettepanekut/ ettepaneku The commission was accepting the proposal.PAR/ The commission accepted the proposal.ACC

  29. SCALE OF PERFECTIVITY/PARTITIVITY OF ESTONIAN VERBS (groups 2-6) hard partitive verbs (e.g., eelistama prefer , armastama love ) soft or weak partitive verbs (e.g., lugema read , veeretama roll ) aspect verbs (e.g., ehitama build ) perfective verbs (e.g., l bi lugema read through , leidma find )

  30. PARTITIVE VERBS = low transitivity verbs (Luraghi & Kittil 2014) semantically very heterogeneous: mostly state verbs that express feelings (nt armastama love , vihkama hate ), relationships (nt usaldama trust , uskuma believe ), desire or need (nt tahtma want , vajama need ) etc, but also action verbs like n gema see , kuulama listen , katsuma touch , maitsma taste , vaatama watch , aitama help , alustama start , m ngima play , t nama thank , nnitlema congratulate , ppima learn , llatama suprise , pildistama take a photo , tervitama greet , tutvustama introduce etc

  31. PARTITIVE VERBS may also denote perfective events: Ma tervita-si-n I.NOM greet-PST-1SG I was greeting/ greeted the neighbour naabri-t. neighbour-PAR are heterogeneous also syntactically: HARD and SOFT partitive verbs (see Klaas 1999)

  32. The scale of partitive verbs (Tamm & Vaiss 2019: 160) Subgroup Type Example 1 a Genuinely hard partitive verbs eelistama prefer , armastama love 1 b Hard partitive verbs that form another lexical item with a lexicalized boundary element tundma know, feel / ra tundma recognize 2 a Framed soft partitive verbs ihuma sharpen , harjutama practice , aitama help , veeretama roll 2 b Contextual soft partitive verbs ppima learn , vaatama watch , lugema read

  33. HARD PARTITIVE VERBS (1a) Total objects are not possible Eelista-n prefer-PRS.1SG I prefer strong coffee kange-t strong-PAR coffee.PAR kohvi.

  34. HARD PARTITIVE VERBS (1b) Total objects are possible only with a perfective particle (NB! another verb lexeme) tundma know ra tundma recognize ehmatama frighten ra ehmatama scare away (shifted meaning)

  35. FRAMED SOFT OR WEAK PARTITIVE VERBS (2a) allow a freely and productively occurring perfectivizing complement Mees man.NOM The man rolled the rocks into the ditch veereta-s roll-PST.3SG rock-ACC.PL ditch-ILL kivi-d kraavi. Mees man.ACC help-IPS.PST sofa-ALL rest-MINF The man was helped to the sofa in order to rest. Mees ihu-s man.NOM sharpen-PST.3SG knife.ACC sharp-TRA The man sharpened the knife aida-ti diivani-le puhka-ma. noa terava-ks.

  36. CONTEXTUAL SOFT OR WEAK PARTITIVE VERBS (2b) require discourse support to occur with a total object The conditions are: an explicit quantifier or qualifier T druk girl.NOM The girl learned one/ a long poem by heart. ppi-s learn-PST.3SG he/ pika one/long.ACC luuletus-e. poem-ACC an aim/reason or the source/ origin ppi-si-n learn-PST-1SG I learned a sonnet for Mother s Day/ from the book. emadep eva-ks/ raamatu-st mother s_day-TRA /book-ELA sonnet-ACC sonet-i. focus on the object s identity or contrast Mina ppi-si-n luuletuse (, sina I.NOM learn-PST-1SG poem.ACC you.NOM I learned a poem by heart (, and you learned a sonnet). sonet-i). sonnet-ACC impersonal constructions Sonett sonnet.ACC A/the sonnet was learned. pi-ti. learn-PST.IPS

  37. ASPECT and PERFECTIVE VERBS In case of aspect and perfective verbs, ACCUSATIVE- PARTITIVE alternation distinguishes aspect. Perfective verbs are mostly used with accusative objects, and very rarely with partitive objects, only if the imperfective event is highlighted lexically, e.g., pidevalt continuously , all the time , parajasti right now , or morfologically, e.g. the mas-infinite form which means that the event is ongoing at the moment. J ri kaotab pidevalt oma spordiriideid. J ri loses his sportwears.PAR all the time J ri on v istlust kaotamas. J ri is losing the competition.PAR

  38. TO CONCLUDE Partitive objecthood is an integral part of the Estonian transitivity. Partitive objects are more frequent in Estonian than the accusative ones because of the multiple functions of the partitive. Semantically, the use of partitive objects refers to reduced transitivity, as they are usually less affected by the action as compared to accusative objects.

  39. THANK YOU!

  40. REFERENCES Dixon, Robert M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald 2000. Introduction. Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity. Ed. by R. M. W. Dixon, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 9 29. Hopper, Paul J. & Sandra A. Thompson 1980. Transitivity in grammar and discourse. Language 62 (2), 251 299. Huumo, Tuomas 2010. Nominal aspect, quantity, and time: The case of the Finnish object. Journal of Linguistics 46 (1), 83 125. Kehayov, Petar & Virve-Anneli Vihman 2014. The lure of lability: A synchronic and diachronic investigation of the labile pattern in Estonian. Linguistics 52 (4), 1061 1105. Kittil , Seppo 2010. Transitivity typology. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Ed. by J.J. Song. Oxford University Press, 346 367. Klaas, B. 1999. Dependence of the object case on the semantics of the verb in Estonian, Finnish, and Lithuanian. Estonian Typological Studies III. Edited by Mati Erelt. Tartu likooli eesti keele ppetooli toimetised 11. Tartu, 47 83 Kont, Karl 1963. K nds naline objekt l nemeresoome keeltes. [Nominal object in Baltic Finnic languages.] (= Keele ja Kirjanduse Instituudi uurimused IX.) Tallinn. Larjavaaara, Matti 2019. Partitiivin valinta. [Choosing of partitive.] Suomalaisen Seura. Helsinki. Letuchiy 2006 = . 2006. : ? [Lability in Russian: an exception or a rule?] 2006, , 343 347. Letuchiy 2013 = . 2013. . [Typology of labile verbs.] : . Luraghi, Silvia 2004. Null objects in Latin and Greek and the relevance of linguistic typology for language reconstruction. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual UCLA Indo-European Conference. Ed. by Karlene Jones-Bley, Martin E. Huld, Angela D. Volpe, Mirriam R. Dexter. (= Journal of Indo-European Monograph Series 49.) Washington: Institute for the Study of Man, 235 256. Luraghi, Silvia & Seppo Kittil 2014. Typology and diachrony of partitive case markers. Partitive cases and related categories. Ed. by Silvia Luraghi, Tuomas Huumo. (= Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 54.) De Gruyter Mouton, 17 62. McMillion, Alan. 2006. Labile verbs in English: Their meaning, behavior and structure. Stockholm: Stockholm University dissertation.

  41. Metslang, Helle 2017. Sihitis. [Object.] Eesti keelesntaks. Toim. MatiErelt, Helle Metslang. (= Eesti keelevaramu III.) Tartu: Tartu likooli Kirjastus, 258 277. N ss, shild 2007. Prototypical Transitivity. (= Typological Studies in Language 72.) Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Onozuka, Hiromi 2007. Remarks on causative verbs and object deletion in English. Language Sciences 29 (4), 538 553. R tsep, Huno 1978. Eesti keele lihtlausete t bid. [Types of simple sentences in Estonian.] Tallinn: Valgus. Tamm, Anne 2012. Scalar Verb Classes: Scalarity, Thematic Roles, and Arguments in the Estonian Aspectual Lexicon. Firenze: Firenze University Press. Tamm, Anne & Natalia Vaiss 2019. Setting the boundaries: Partitive verbs in Estonian verb classifications. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika hinguaastaraamat, 15, 159 181. Vaiss, Natalia 2020. Kogesin vapustust v i vapustuse? Sihilised verbid valikute ees. [Estonian transitive verbs facing choices.] Eesti Rakenduslingvistika hinguaastaraamat, 16, 241 261. Vaiss, Natalia 2021. Verbide transitiivsuse kontiinumist eesti keeles. [The verbal transitivity continuum in Estonian.] Emakeele Seltsi aastaraamat 66, 344 386.

More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#