Katalin Sipocz from the University of Szeged analysed ditransitivity
in the Ob-Ugric languages from a typological perspective, drawing conclusions about the possible ways such constructions have developed in Mansi and Khanty.
Tritransitives constitute an interesting construction type since they exceed the limits of ditransitivity
, which is, to best of my knowledge, the highest number of obligatory arguments required by any lexical verb in any language.
The mere number of arguments, however, is not a sufficient criterion of ditransitivity in the present context; argument marking has to be considered as well.
In addition to merely illustrating the formal ditransitivity of 'give', I will also offer an explanation of it based on semantic evidence; the account which refers merely to its high frequency of occurrence is an intriguing one, but leaves too many questions unanswered.
In Section 2, the formal ditransitivity of 'give' will be illustrated in the light of the features relevant to formal transitivity in general.
In this section, I illustrate the formal ditransitivity of 'give'.
Hence we cannot argue for genuine ditransitivity of any of these clauses.
If the latter is taken as a criterion of transitivity (as it often is), the capacity to express two objects can be seen as a feature of ditransitivity. On the other hand, verbs that need applicativization for this are more similar to transitive clauses derived via causativization and do not qualify as ditransitive, in the same way that causativized intransitives are not considered basic transitive verbs.
The ditransitivity of 'give' is further reflected in the fact that in many languages the benefactive application of 'give' produces a four-place verb, as in the languages illustrated below:
In (22)-(23), the result is a verb with three objects that bear the same marking as the direct object, which provides direct evidence for the inherent ditransitivity associated with 'give' in the cited languages.
they are marked on the verb with the same affixes), there is no adequate way of arguing for the higher formal transitivity (let alone ditransitivity) of either agreement pattern.