Differential Object Marking in Tuvan language: dependence on the function and nature of the definition

For the Tuvan language, factors influencing Differential Object Marking remain uncovered despite extensive studies on the topic. This is due to the numerous cases of forms of the primary and accusative cases of the direct object replacing each other without noticeably changing the meaning of the sentence. Thus, it is necessary to elucidate all the causes of variation and establish their interactions. The current study focuses on the dependence of the direct object labeling on the function and the nature of the definition in the Tuvan language. The paper highlights the interaction of semantic, syntactic, communicative, and pragmatic factors influencing the choice of labeling. The analysis revealed that the direct object with the definition as a whole does not require a case. Firstly, the semantics of definition occupies a decisive place, as in the case of indexical pronouns (as a means of expressing anaphoric and deictic meanings). Secondly, the communicative role of the defined object in the utterance is of significance. The definition acts as a link between the object defined and the previous reference to that object, indicating information about the object that is already familiar to the addressee. Thirdly, discursive factors are distinct and important, including the speaker’s intention to clarify the referent or generalize by different means the meaning of the referent in the discourse depending on his or her goal. Thus, the referential properties of definitions alone do not allow unambiguously predicting the labeling of the nominal group.