OBJEKTI KÄÄNE HINNANGUKONSTRUKTSIOONIS: KAS ON VÕIMALIK OSTA AUTO VÕI AUTOT?
Object case variation in the Estonian assessment construction

Summary/Abstract: The article analyzes object case variation in the Estonian da-infinitive assess¬ment construction, consisting of a da-infinitive phrase in subject position and an adjectival predicate expressing the speaker’s assessment of the activity described by the infinitive phrase. Four factors influencing object case in the assessment construction are discussed in the article. To begin with, it is shown that object case is affected by three properties of the adjectival predicate; first, whether the assessment is a value judgment or a judgment of possibility; second, whether the assessment is result-oriented or process-oriented; and third, for judgments of possibility, whether said judgment is affirmative or negative. Secondly, object case depends heavily on word order; in sentence-initial position, the object almost always appears in the partitive, while in sentence-final position the total object is far more common. It is hypothesized that this is related to the information-structural properties of the object; focused objects appear in the total object case, while backgrounded objects take the partial object case. Thirdly, the presence of a goal adverbial dramatically increases the likelihood that the total object will be used. Finally, the total object is used more often in definite, non-repeating situations than in generic, repeating situations. Although some of the factors outlined above are related to the criterion of boundedness, which drives the choice of object case in finite clauses, not all of them are; in particular, word order and certain relevant properties of the ad-jectival predicate cannot reasonably be seen as influencing the boundedness of the situation described. Furthermore, those factors which are clearly related to boundedness, more specifically to aspect (repeating vs. non-repeating situations, goal adverbials, process- vs. result-orientation of the adjectival predicate) affect object case differently in the da-infinitive assessment construction than they do in finite clauses. With this in mind, it is clear that the rules governing object case in Estonian vary from one construction to another. Further investigation is required in order to determine which of the factors discussed in this article are specific to the assessment construction and which are common to non-finite constructions in general.

• Details
• Contents