The phenomenon of differential object marking (DOM) is widely spread across languages and considered to be one of the features characterizing the Finno-Ugric, Altaic and some other language families [Aissen 1998; Moravcsik 1978]. For these languages there exist two basic patterns for DO encoding, namely the overt case marker or no overt marking. There are various attempts to suggest the syntactic account for this phenomenon. First, the DP/NP having the ‘theme’ role of two-argument predicates can occupy different syntactic positions in a clause. It could be VP internal, it could move to the AgrP to case checking. Moreover, as it has been shown in the literature in some languages both forms can occupy the same syntactic position.
The book is devoted to the word order typology. The languages with free order are under discussion. It concerns verious phenomena that can trgger word order variation and have impact on the syntactic structure of a sentence such as infromation structure, differential argument marking, clitics position etc.
The article focuses on the ordering of arguments in Russian. The central class of phenomena is represented by verbs having a clausal complement that has a fixed position with respect to other arguments and the matrix verb. I mostly analyze verbs like "ščitat’" ‘consider’, "rassmatrivat’ kak" ‘regard as’, "trebovat’" ‘request, require’, which require the clausal complement to be situated after the nominal object, but not before it. I seek to find the reasons for this restriction, which is in general not characteristic of Russian syntax. The conclusion is that it results from several factors: the syntactic weight of complement clauses, looseness of syntactic link with the head, compared to nominal arguments, and so on. The data of other Russian constructions (e. g., coordinate structures) also show that clausal constituents tend to be situated after nominal ones.