Evangelia Adamou

Yaron Matras

Romani syntactic typology

This chapter presents an overview of the principal syntactic-typological features of Romani dialects. It draws on the discussion in Matras (2002, chapter 7) while taking into consideration more recent studies. In particular, we draw on the wealth of morphosyntactic data that have since become available via the Romani Morpho-Syntax (RMS)

database.1 The RMS data are based on responses to the Romani Morpho-Syntax questionnaire recorded from Romani speaking communities across Europe and beyond.

We try to take into account a representative sample. We also take into consideration data from free-speech recordings available in the RMS database and the Pangloss Collection. In addition, our chapter is informed by universal studies in syntactic typology, as represented by the entries of the World Atlas of Language Structures (WALS), and other selected typological work.

Matras (2002, chapter 7) covers in comparative perspective prominent features of

 devote chapters to

modality, (morphological) case roles, and localization (the lexico-grammatical expression of spatial relations). [START_REF] Elšík | Modality in Romani[END_REF] discuss modality categories, while [START_REF] Matras | Complementizers in Romani[END_REF] provide an overview of complementation. [START_REF] Tenser | Semantic map borrowing -case representation in Northeastern Romani dialects[END_REF] discussion of semantic map borrowing in Northeastern Romani dialects is perhaps an isolated study of a syntactic-typological topic in a particular dialect group. In addition, consideration is given to syntactic-typological categories in a number of descriptive studies of individual dialects that have followed [START_REF] Matras | Romani: a linguistic introduction[END_REF], among them [START_REF] Tenser | Lithuanian Romani[END_REF] on Lithuanian Romani and [START_REF] Tenser | Northeastern group of Romani dialects[END_REF] on the Northeastern dialects, [START_REF] Leggio | The dialect of the Mitrovica Roma[END_REF] on Mitrovica Romani, [START_REF] Arvaniti | Focus expression in Romani[END_REF] and [START_REF] Adamou | A corpus-driven approach to language contact[END_REF] on Greek Thrace Romani, [START_REF] Adamou | Replicating Spanish estar in Mexican Romani[END_REF] on Mexican Vlax, [START_REF] Bodnárová | Vend Romani: A grammatical description and sociolinguistic situation of the so-called Vend dialects of Hungary[END_REF] on Vend Romani, [START_REF] Leggio | Variation and dialect levelling in the Romani dialect of Ţăndărei[END_REF] on Kangljari Romani, and Benišek (2017) on a North Central Romani 'diaspora' variety spoken in Ukraine.

The noun

In this section, we discuss linear order in the noun phrase, the prepositional phrase, and the possessive noun phrase, as well as agreement.

The noun phrase

The Romani noun phrase (NP) has four prenominal slots. Quantifiers such as 'all' and 'every' occupy the first slot. A number of determiners that typically do not combine with one another occupy the second slot: demonstratives, definite and indefinite articles, and possessive determiners such as 'my'. Numerals occupy the third slot, and descriptive adjectives the fourth, immediately preceding the noun. Demonstratives, possessive determiners and descriptive adjectives can (in some dialects) optionally follow the noun. Figure 1 illustrates the linear order within the Romani NP (adapted from [START_REF] Matras | Romani: a linguistic introduction[END_REF]. Most Romani dialects have a four-term system of demonstratives which distinguishes reference to the discourse context vs. the speech situation (a distinction that only partly corresponds to proximal vs. distal in physical space), and +specific vs.specific (Matras 2002, pp.103-104). Some dialects exhibit a reduced two-term system (for example Sinti Romani). Demonstratives generally inflect for gender, number, and case, and typically precede the noun (DEM-N). The prenominal position is illustrated in (1) from Czech Vlax.

(1) Czech Vlax, Czech Republic (RMS, 386) kadi angrustji anda somnakaj-i this.NOM.F ring from gold-is 'This ring is made of gold.'

In addition, demonstratives may follow the noun (N-DEM). This option is reported for some RMS dialects from Romania such as Ursari, Spoitori, Kurturare, Kangljari/Peptenari. In this case, however, the definite article is required (the article remains in the prenominal position), e.g., Spoitori o skaunos kaka (the chair this) 'this chair; or Sofades Romani (Greece) i romni adaja (the woman this) 'this woman' (example 3 below).

The definite article always precedes the noun (ART-N), as in (2a) from Sofades Romani. Some dialects show reduction or a loss of the definite articles as a result of contact with languages that have no definite articles, as in (2b) from the Polska Roma dialect spoken in Poland, (2c) from a Lovari variety spoken in Russia, and (2d) from Finnish Romani:

( Greek influence (Igla 1996, p.165). In (3) from Sofades, a demonstrative precedes the article (DEM-ART-N), and another follows the noun (ART-N-DEM).

(3) Sofades, Greece (RMS, GR-004, 422) Romani shows an indefinite article, used with singular nouns, derived from the numeral jek/ekh/ek 'one', grammaticalized to various degrees [START_REF] Matras | Untersuchungen zu Grammatik und Diskurs des Romanes[END_REF][START_REF] Friedman | A multilingual festschrift for Norbert Boretzky. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, Beihefte[END_REF]).

Example in (4) shows the indefinite article in Vlax Romani from Greece accompanying the presentation of a new participant. Example (5) illustrates the indefinite article with a non-referential noun. Adamou (2016, p.158) Adjectives that express a descriptive property, such as 'big', 'good', or 'red', precede the nouns (ADJ-N). This is illustrated in (8) for the adjective 'big' in Mexican Vlax.

However, speakers can also postpose adjectives as afterthoughts (Matras 2002, p.167);

this is the case in various RMS samples from Romania, including Vlax, Sinti, and Romungro, as well as in Vlax dialects in other countries (Czech Republic, Mexico, and Ukraine), Lombard Sinti, as well as in some samples from the Balkans, including Albania, Macedonia, and Serbia. The N-ADJ order is illustrated in (9) for Mexican Vlax, using the same adjective, 'big'. (Note that variation in the placement of the adjective is also found in the current contact language, Spanish, associated with differences in meaning or in the degree of evaluation As these examples show, possessors in the genitive case agree with the possessed head noun in number, gender, as well as in case, here in the nominative.

Romani thus offers a typologically interesting example of 'double case' or 'Suffixaufhname' [START_REF] Payne | Inflecting postpositions in Indic and Kashmiri[END_REF][START_REF] Plank | Re-)Introducing Suffixaufnahme[END_REF]. These examples further illustrate that determiners, such as articles, demonstratives, and numerals, can determine the possessor. For example, the definite article e in ( 12) is in the oblique case, agreeing with the genitive case of the possessor 'man'. In (11), however, the demonstrative, kodaj 'this' agrees with the possessed head noun in gender and case, a type of agreement noted by Koptjevskaja-Tamm (2000, p.130) as a breakdown of the traditional system.

In some Romani dialects, the genitive may appear in the postnominal position (N-GEN)

with more or less high frequency (this option is reported in RMS samples from the Balkans, including Albania, Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Romania, and in some and 'flagging' (adpositional marking) with animates; see more details in section 6. In ditransitive constructions, alignment is neutral when considering 'ordering' (word order) and 'indexing' (T = P = R), though it is indirective in 'flagging' (T = P ≠ R). In sum, Romani does not rely on word order to encode the functions of core arguments.

Rather, information structuring determines word order in the verb phrase. Thetic constructions, on the other hand, do not rely on picking up a single argument as a predication base but instead on the situation as a whole. This is indicated through verbsubject (VS) word order. VS order is often used in presentational constructions to introduce new topics into a narrative setting:

( The event portrayed in ( 22b) is presented as the outcome of the preceding state of affairs; this is indicated through VS order. In (22c), we then have a new perspective, introduced by anchoring the predication around a different topical entity. Here, SV order occurs.

These discourse-pragmatic functions allow making some general predictions about the occurrences of SV and VS, which relativize the impression of free or extremely flexible word order rules. Arguably, there are also additional factors that play a role in the choice of word order, most notably the choice of particular types of predicates and subjects. Igla (1996, p.153) suggests that VS is the unmarked word order when the subject is inanimate, non-determined, and a non-agent, the variant SV being restricted to a (contrastive) emphasis of S. On the other hand, maximum variation is found with subjects that are animate, determined, and which figure as agents. The constraints on variability are thus understood as a continuum (non-agentive animate subjects figuring in between). Predicates that are more likely to trigger VS are those involved in presentative constructions, such as existentials and some verbs of motion, particularly those expressing arrival. Igla (1996, p.151) lists in this connection statements about time and nature (nakhlas ekh berš 'a year passed').

In Romani monotransitive clauses, P-like arguments generally follow the verb, whether they are new or given in the discourse:

(23) Xoraxane, Greece (Adamou 2016, p.176) lav e lastika take.1SG DEF.OBL.F hose 'I take the hose.' P-like arguments may precede the verb for topicalization and focus, generally combining with prosodic marking (Arvaniti and Adamou 2011), as in (24), where the focused constituent, 'pills', combines with de-accenting of the postfocal material, in this case the verb.

(24) Xoraxane, Greece (Arvaniti and Adamou 2011, p.243) me apora peradom my pills lost.1SG

'I lost my PILLS.'

Fronting of P arguments is possible in a variety of dialects (reported for RMS samples from Bulgaria, Czech Vlax, Romungro, Finnish Romani, Macedonian Arli, Gabor and Šušuwaje in Romania).

Universally, A-arguments are rarely expressed by full NPs in natural discourse, as noted for several corpora from a variety of languages [START_REF] Haig | The discourse basis of ergativity revisited[END_REF]. In Romani, when A-arguments are expressed by an NP and co-occur with P pronominal arguments, the pronominal P argument follows the verb:

(25) Erli [START_REF] Boretzky | Erli. Eine Bestandsaufnahme nach den Texte von Gilliat-Smith[END_REF] There is agreement that the construction is not grammaticalised in Romani, but represents a facultative structure triggered at the discourse level (see Boretzky 1993a, pp.94-96;Bubeník 1997, p.102;Friedman 2000, p.197). [START_REF] Friedman | Proleptic and resumptive object pronouns in Romani: a Balkan noun phrase perspective[END_REF] points out that unlike the other Balkan languages, Romani preserves a rather complex case declension, and does not have a clear opposition between clitic and non-clitic object pronouns. Both the motivation for object doubling and the structural resources employed in the construction therefore differ.

In (Matras 1994, pp. 206-210); it is also available in Modern Greek [START_REF] Alexopoulou | Resumption in relative clauses[END_REF]. Case, animacy and definiteness may condition the resumptive strategy, which in many dialects is obligatory with non-nominative subjects.

Examples in ( 46) and ( 47) illustrate optional resumption in restrictive relatives. In (46a) the resumptive pronoun carries the case marking for the direct object relative clause. In (46b) there is no resumption, but the head is marked for the oblique (direct object) case.

(46) 'The man that I/we saw yesterday is here (again).' General simultaneity 'when' is usually expressed by the subordinator kana, which can also be used for more precise temporal relations such as immediate anteriority ('as soon as') or parallel duration ('while', 'as long as'). In some dialects, specific simultaneity, 'just as', is expressed through a different subordinator, for example sar in (54c) from

East Slovak Romani and syr in (54d) from Polska Roma. The temporal domain shows extensive borrowing as can be seen in (54a) for Arli using the Slavic koga.

(54) 'When I was young, I lived in a big house in a town.' In Welsh Romani and in some Sinti/Manuš varieties, the indefinite marker kek 'nothing' (<*ka-jekh) is occasionally used as an independent, postposed negator, e.g., kamelas kek 'he didn't want' [START_REF] Elšík | Inherited indefinites in Romani[END_REF]. In German Sinti, the German particle gar undergoes a similar development, and in some varieties, it serves as the principal indicative negator, e.g., kamom gar 'I didn't want'.

Negative indefinites are prone to renewal processes through internal grammaticalisation and borrowing. Their specialisation as negatives is recent and dialect-specific [START_REF] Elšík | Inherited indefinites in Romani[END_REF]. Negative indefinite expressions in Romani are generally related to indefinites with a positive meaning, though in some cases traces of positive readings appear only marginally (e.g., general Vlax khanči 'nothing', but Agia Varvara

Vlax kajši 'something'). One can therefore assume that clause negation relied originally primarily on the verb negator rather than on an indefinite negative. This state of affairs is generally continued in Romani irrespective of the subsequent specialisation of some of the indefinite expressions as negative indefinites.

( takes a different case, which is more marked than the nominative case. Different authors refer to this case as an 'accusative' or as an 'independent oblique' (see [START_REF] Matras | Romani: a linguistic introduction[END_REF]. In contrast, the inanimate P argument has the same marking as the S and A arguments, that is, it exhibits neutral case marking. The different case marking patterns observed in Romani depending on the types of full NP are quite common cross-linguistically (Comrie 2013, WALS 98).

In Romani, the recipient-like (R) argument of verbs such as 'to give' and 'to show' is expressed through the dative case marker; see (66a). However, the independent oblique case may also be used, as exemplified in (66b).

(66) 'People give the priest some food.' In accordance with cross-linguistic tendencies associated with a VO order, Romani dialects have prepositions (an innovative feature from a New Indo-Aryan perspective where postpositions are common) and a dominant ADJ-N order in NPs, the adjective preceding the noun (an order that is more frequently associated with OV languages) (Dryer 2013, WALS 95, 96, 97). In addition, relative clauses are postnominal (NREL), a feature which is cross-linguistically common, but tends to be absent in Indic languages where the relative clause precedes the noun (RELN) (Dryer 2013, WALS 90). Interestingly, Romani has kept dependent marking in possessive noun phrases, a dominant feature of the languages of India (Nichols and Bickel 2013, WALS 24). The Romani genitive noun phrase precedes the head noun, an order that is rare in European languages but predominant in India (Dryer 2013, WALS 86).

The migration of the Romani-speaking populations beyond the Balkans led to the split of Romani into contemporary dialects. Contact with a number of different languages shaped the typological features of particular Romani varieties, leading, for example, to the emergence of new infinitives in some dialects, and the loss of definite articles or gender distinction in others.

Romani is of interest to typologists as it illustrates the significance of the geographical distribution of typological features over genetic affiliation at two levels:

First, through the emergence of a number of shared innovations in contact with Byzantine Greek, which changed the typological profile of Romani in comparison to the other Indo-Aryan languages. Second, through dialect-specific innovations which emerged following contact with different European languages.

Figure 1 .

 1 Figure 1. Linear order in the NP

'

  This girl, this woman, has three children.'

  , and Comrie (2010), we distinguish three types of constructions involving a verb: intransitive constructions comprise a single argument (S). Mono-transitive constructions comprise an agent or agent-like argument (A) and a patient or patient-like argument (P), traditionally referred to as an object. Ditransitive constructions consist of a (ditransitive) verb, an agent argument (A), a recipient-like argument (R), and a theme argument (T). At the notional level, the R argument would correspond to what is traditionally known as an indirect object, and the T argument to a direct object. Most Romani dialects display what Malchukov, Haspelmath, and Comrie (2010) identify as neutral alignment (A = S = P) in most clauses, alongside what is identified as accusative alignment (A = S ≠ P) in 'indexing' (agreement or person cross-reference)

3. 2

 2 Word order in main clauses Most Romani dialects exhibit what can be classified as a thetic-categorical distinction in word order patterns (cf. Sasse 1995; Matras 1995): Categorical predications, or those that pick up a topical category as the perspective of the utterance, tend to show the subject in pre-verbal position. This is exemplified in (20), where Speaker A introduces the topical entity 'The Bajaša' (the Beash people) in a question. Speaker B then picks up the same as a topic entity to answer the question in the following turn in an adjacency pair: (20) Kurturare, Romania (RMS, RO-015, Txt) Bajaša NEG go.PL DEF.PL Bajaša fight.PL REFL Speaker A: 'Do the Bajaša also go to kris [Romani court]?' Speaker B: 'The Bajaša do not go, the Bajaša fight.'

  2) 'I couldn't open the door.'

	I	NEG can.1SG open.INF door
	In most Romani dialects, demonstratives and definite articles cannot form
	combinations. However, in Romani dialects of Greece, combinations are possible, under
	(a) Sofades, Greece (RMS, GR-004, 419)
	nasti		putravas		i	porta
	cannot open.1SG.REM	DEF.OBL.F door
	(b) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-003, 419)
	me na	mogindžom	te	phiraveł	vudara
	I	NEG can.PST.1SG COMP open.INF door
	(c) Lovari Čokeši, Russia (RMS, RUS-005, 419)
	mə naštyk putros		udar
	I	cannot open.1SG.REM door
	(d) East Finnish Romani, Finland (RMS, FIN-002, 419)
	me na	vojuvā	firavel	fūtar

  Unlike in Mexican Vlax, in some dialects postnominal adjectives only occur with doubling of the definite article, e.g., in Agia Varvara Vlax in Greece: i čhej i bari (the girl the big) 'the big girl', replicating the Greek model(Igla 1996, p.166). Whereas in Tamm 2000, p.126). Anchoring genitive adnominals are used among others for kinship, as illustrated in (11), body parts, as in (12), and ownership, as in (13). Genitive adnominals in Romani can also serve to qualify the head noun, for

	(13) Czech Vlax, Czech Republic (RMS, CZ-001, 511)
	jekhe	šāv-esk-o		gad sas šingerdo
	one.OBL boy-GEN.M-NOM.M shirt was cut
	example, to express quality, age, duration, or material, as illustrated in (14). These are 'One boy's shirt was torn.'
	Romani determiner spreading requires a postnominal adjective, in Modern Greek it can the so-called 'non-anchoring' genitive adnominals. Koptjevskaja-Tamm (2000, p.145)
	occur with both a prenominal or postnominal adjective (Kolliakou 2004). stresses that anchoring genitive adnominals are closer to nouns, as they involve (14) Kalajdži, Bulgaria (RMS, BG-007, 841)
	reference, whereas non-anchoring genitive adnominals show lower degrees of similarity kindem galben-osk-o koro
	2.2 Prepositional phrase with nouns as they are non-referential. buy.PST.1SG gold-GEN.M-NOM.M	bracelet
	Romani has prepositions, as commonly found in other Indo-European languages spoken (11) Czech Vlax, Czech Republic (RMS, CZ-001, 594) thaj ka dav les məndrə dija-ke
	in Europe, whereas postpositions are dominant in Modern Indo-Aryan languages of the koda-j šāv-esk-i dej and FUT give.1SG it.OBL my.OBL mother.OBL.F-DAT
	Indian Sub-Continent: 'I bought a golden bracelet that I will give to my mother.'
	(10) Sofia Erli, Bulgaria (RMS, BG-024, 644)
	o	lil	si upral i	masa	).
	DEF letter is on	DEF table
	(8) Mexican Vlax, Mexico (RMS, MX-001, 593)
	o (12) Czech Vlax, Czech Republic (RMS, CZ-001, 600) dat katar šavořo sas les ek	bari šoro
	DEF father from boy e rom-esk-o was him.OBL INDF big beard šejro
	'The boy's father had such a big beard.' DEF.OBL.M man-GEN.M-NOM.M	head
	(9) Mexican Vlax, Mexico (RMS, MX-001, 908) sas tejle šaradoj kolopo-sa
	jek was down cover.GER hat-INS žukel baro daravel	le	cinořen
	INDF dog	big frighten.3SG DEF children.OBL.PL

'A big dog frightens the children.' 'The letter is on the table.'

2.3 Possessive noun phrase

The locus of marking in the possessive noun phrase is on the dependent (possessor), not on the head of the phrase (possessed noun). The order of the genitive adnominal (possessor) in relation to the head noun (possessed) is typically GEN-N, the genitive preceding the noun it modifies. Romani adnominal genitives can serve to identify the referent that is expressed by the head noun; they are dubbed 'anchoring' genitive adnominals (Koptjevskajathis.NOM.F-DEF.NOM.F boy-GEN.M-NOM.F mother sas lāši taj kamaratska was nice.F and friendly 'The boy's mother was nice and friendly.'

'The man's head was covered with a hat.'

  The typical Balkan 'pronominal object doubling' construction is found in the Balkan and Vlax dialects of Romani (RMS samples from Bulgaria, Moldavia, Romania, Ukraine, as well as in Nea Smirni in Greece, Molise in Italy, and some samples in

	(26) Welsh Romani (Sampson 1926, p.226)
	kamdias	les	ī		raklī
	love.PST.3SG him.OBL DEF.NOM.F girl
	'The girl loved him.'
	, p.147) (28) Bugurdži (Boretzky 1993a, p.95)
	pale dikhel patózel	les	la	o	o	thagar divi e	romes
	again see.3SG her.OBL DEF.NOM.M king squeeze.3SG him.OBL DEF.NOM.M giant DEF.OBL.M man.OBL
	'The king saw her again.' 'The giant squeezes the man.'

Serbia and Kosovo). Pronominal object doubling involves exposition of a topical patient, with a co-referential resumptive pronoun in the position following the verb (cf.

Bubeník 1997, p.100

; see also

[START_REF] Friedman | Proleptic and resumptive object pronouns in Romani: a Balkan noun phrase perspective[END_REF]

:

(27) Sepeči, Turkey

(Cech and Heinschink 1999, p.142)

adaja gili da but gilavelas la this.F song too much sing.3SG.REM her.OBL 'She used to often sing this song too.'

  Romani ditransitive constructions, with verbs such as 'to give', 'to sell', 'to lend', 'to tell', recipient-like arguments (cf. indirect objects) and theme-like arguments (cf. direct objects) typically follow the verb. In several dialects, nominal R-arguments may precede or follow nominal T-arguments; thus, in most RMS samples from In yes/no questions, a VS order is illustrated for Romungro in (33). Variation between a VS and an SV order is recorded in RMS samples from Velingrad Yerli in Bulgaria, Romungro in Hungary, Molise and Kylmyš in Ukraine, and Katolikurja in Serbia, Gabor, Šušuwaje, Piculesči, and Spoitari from Romania, among other. VS dominant order in yes/no clauses is reported in the RMS samples from Nea Smirni in Greece, Lombard Sinti in Italy, Mexican Vlax, and in most dialects of Romania.In non-factual subordinations, such as purpose clauses, modal complements, and conditional clauses introduced by te, the verb immediately follows the conjunction te. In some dialects, the verb may occupy the final sentence position, in particular through influence from Slavic contact languages. Such uses are reported in the RMS samples from the Balkans (Bulgaria, Greece, Macedonia, Serbia) but also Austrian Sinti, Sinti varieties show various degrees of convergence with German word order rules. In the most extreme cases, the German distinction between main clause (verb in second position), subordinate clause (verb in final position), and interrogative clause (verb in initial position) is adopted consistently (see Matras 1999b). This rule is not compromised even in those varieties of German Sinti that have adopted German word order and that have the verb in final position in all other subordinate clauses(Matras 1999b). Isolated exceptions to the rule are found however in some of

	AVTR TARV (42) Xoraxani, Bulgaria (RMS, BG-015, 869) 4. Complex clauses isineh but nava amakši
	(b) Lithuanian Romani, Lithuania (RMS, LT-005/LT-008, 965) (31) Russian Roma, Russia (RMS, RUS-003, 963) (33) 'Is the water boiling?' kana odva asala bütüj kvartal može te was many new car
	rašaj im'ej v vidu odova so del čhavor-es me tuke bold-e Romungro, Hungary (RMS, HU-009, 887) when DEM.M laugh.3SG everyone neighbour can rakirav 4.1 Relative clauses	da-ke COMP
	priest have in mind that.M what I give.3SG boy-OBL.M tatjol o pānji? the Central dialects (Boretzky 1996b, p.107), and most systematically in Roman as baptized-OBL.M mother.OBL.F-DAT you.DAT tell.1SG (b) Kaldaraš, Romania (RMS, RO-008, 590)
	'You should keep in mind what I tell you.' boil.3SG DEF.M water shown in (39). šunel les In this chapter, we rely on the definition of relative clauses as subordinate clauses that o murš savo avilo kaj nunta
	hear.3SG him.OBL are used to delimit the reference of a NP (Andrews 2007). Almost all Romani dialects in DEF.NOM.M man who come.PST.3SG to.F wedding
	Definite and indefinite animate T-arguments can be fronted or topicalized in a 3.2 Word order in interrogative and subordinate clauses Non-factual complement clauses and conditional clauses, both introduced by te, show (39) Roman (Wogg and Halwachs 1998, p.53) 'When he laughs, the whole neighbourhood can hear him.' the RMS sample introduce relative clauses with the uninflected complementizers kaj
	number of dialects, but this is more rarely the case for inanimate T-arguments (coding an overwhelming, if not absolute, tendency toward VS order. te me valakaj gejom si les mašina nevi
	In wh-questions, the wh-word appears in clause initial position: COMP I somewhere went.1SG is.3SG him.OBL car new.F
	(36) Lovari (Matras 1994, p.225) 'If I went somewhere…'
	(32) 'What did he give you? Nothing.' amende akana te merel Pronominal resumption in relative clauses may have developed in Early Romani varekon
	AVRT (a) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 965) o rašaj del e TVR (30) Xoraxane, Greece (Adamou 2016, p.179) em birindʒi moromandila daas (a) Romungro, Hungary (RMS, HU-009, 385) so tut dinja? ništa what you.OBL give.PST.3SG nothing (b) Lovari, Serbia (RMS, YU-015, 385) so das tu vo? khanči 'Among us, now, if somebody dies …' (37) Sinti, Germany (Holzinger 1993, p.163) me kamoms te vals I want.1SG.REM COMP come.2SG.REM you čjirv-ja-ke tuke tu kana isine o roma ko balanipe (43) Roman (Wogg and Halwachs 1998, p.48) ada berš kezdinčom andi iškola te džal this year begin.PST.1SG in.F school COMP go.INF 'That year I began to go to school.' resumptive pronoun: Romungro (34) Romungro, Hungary (RMS, HU-009, 345b) us.LOC now COMP die.3SG somebody through contact with Greek
	DEF.NOM.M priest give.3SG DEF.OBL.F godmother-OBL.F-DAT FOC first_class swipes give.1SG.REM you.DAT what give.PST.3SG you he.NOM nothing na kamav ando gav te džan 'I would have liked you to have come.' when was DEF.M Rom.PL in Greece
	'I was giving you first-class swipes!' NEG want.1SG in.DEF.M village COMP go.INF 'When the Rom were in Greece…' (44) Polska Roma (Matras 1999a, p.19) (45) 'The man who came to the wedding has many new cars/a new car.'
	e 'I do not want to go to town.' cinor-es (38) Sinti, Germany (Holzinger 1993, p.156) taša džasam sare dro veš	kašta	te	čhineł
	DEF.OBL.F baby-OBL.M In the Northeastern dialects, non-topical R arguments appear before the verb, as in te krel miri čaj kova, dan leli daba (41) Sepeči, Turkey (Cech and Heinschink 1999, p.144) tomorrow go.1PL.FUT all in forest wood.PL COMP cut.INF (a) Nea Smirni Romani, Greece (RMS, GR-032, 590)
	example (31) where the dative pronoun tuke 'to you' precedes the verb 'to tell' (see (35) Romungro, Hungary (RMS, HU-009, 346b) COMP do.3SG my.F daughter this then get.3SG.F blows kana čhaj isinomas 'Tomorrow we will all go to the forest to cut wood.' oduua rom ka avilo ko bjav
	Boretzky 1996b, p.102, Rusakov and Abramenko 1998, p.128). na kames te džan ando gav 'If my daughter does this, she will get blows.' when girl was.1SG that.M man COMP come.PST.3SG to.M wedding
	'When I was a young girl …'

Romania the two orders are equally frequent. TR (or DO-IO) order is possible in Ukraine, possible but not preferred in Sofia Erli and Spoitori, while it is the preferred option in Nea Smirni in Greece. The two word order patterns are exemplified in (29a) and (29b). Similar options are available for pronominal arguments. (29) 'The priest gives the godmother the baby.' indicates this possibility in four RMS samples for definite inanimate objects in the accusative; none when they are indefinite). T-arguments can precede verbs when focused, as can be seen in the example in (30). Here the T-argument, 'swipes', combines with the focus-sensitive particle em. The R-argument, the dative pronoun tuke 'to you', remains in the postverbal position. in Hungary, Molise in Italy, Crimean in Russia, Laeši Kurtej in Moldavia, Kubanska Vlaxurja in Ukraine, and Eastern Rumungro in Slovakia. Examples (34) and (35) illustrate the variation in the position of the verb in a subordinate clause in Romungro, occurring within the same elicitation context. NEG want.2SG COMP go.INF in.DEF.M village 'You do not want to go to town.'

For Sepeči,

Cech and Heinschink (1999, p.144)

suggest that tendencies towards VS in temporal adverbial clauses, as in (40), may be overridden when S is focused, resulting in SV, as in (41). Example in (42) illustrates SV order with a pronoun.

(40) Sepeči, Turkey

(Cech and Heinschink 1999, p.144)

Some central European dialects show tendencies towards what Boretzky refers to as a

'split verb frame'

(Boretzky 1996b, pp.104-105)

. This involves the fronting of constituents of the modal quasi-infinitive verb in te-clauses. See examples in (43) from Roman and from Polska Roma in (44).

(from kaj 'where'). Most also use the uninflected complementizer so/hoj 'what' to relativize nouns referring to non-humans, but some dialects additionally use them for humans. Some dialects also use the relative pronouns savo 'which' (inflecting for case, gender, and number) and kon 'who' (inflecting for case). As seen in (

45

), Romani relative clauses are externally headed and postnominal, i.e., the relative clause follows the head noun (NRel). Subject relativizers can follow two 'primary' relativization strategies

[START_REF] Keenan | Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar[END_REF]

: The 'gap strategy' shows a complementizer without explicit coreferentiality with the head noun (45a), while the inflected relative pronoun (45b) shows agreement with the head noun and in this case also an inflected

  By contrast, TE is stable, with rare exceptions, e.g., Bulgarian Xoraxani borrows da from Bulgarian. In some dialects, the complementizer is omitted with uninflected impersonal modals of positive and negative ability 'can' and 'cannot' (seeElšik and Matras 2006, p.206;[START_REF] Matras | Complementizers in Romani[END_REF] for more details). Welsh Romani and Istrian/Slovene Romani are the only dialects that have not retained the factuality distinction, but generalise te.

	sy pale kačhe Examples in (48) illustrate the use of KAJ: (49) 'I want him/her to go away/home.' (50) 'I told her to buy mushrooms, onions and cabbage.' (e) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 438) temporal simultaneity kana, kada/keda, sar/har/syr, (52) 'If you had come yesterday, you would have seen her.' (53) 'I asked the male teacher whether he is coming to the wedding.'
	is again here Modal verbs of a 'secondary semantic type', such as 'begin', verbs expressing mental phindžjom laki te kinel i šfami kaj, so, afu (51) 'If I drink a lot of milk, I will be strong.'
	states, like 'fear', and the impersonal modals of ability 'can', 'cannot' and necessity (48) 'They (probably) thought that I was in the pub.' (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 436) (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 438) tell.PST.1SG her.DAT COMP buy.3SG DEF.NOM.PL mushrooms anteriority sar/syr/har, angla sar, angla (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 411) (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 429)
	(b) Nea Smirni Romani, Greece (RMS, GR-032, 809) 'must', also introduce complement clauses. In typological perspective, Romani Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 460) mangava le te džal peske vakerdum łake te kineł pečurke purum hem armin kodo ke, bi te na, prin te (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 423) te avinje erati ka dikhejne ła pučhlum e učitele dali ka avol ko bijav
	i complement clauses are finite and 'balanced', that is, the verb form follows that of the muršes kaj dikhlom i rat isi athe oła najverojatno mislinde kaj injum me ko bari want.1SG him.OBL COMP go.3SG REFL.DAT tell.PST.1SG her.DAT COMP buy.3SG mushrooms onions and cabbage puruma ti šaxa] posteriority kana, kada/keda, sar/har/syr, te pilum but thud k ovav but siłno COMP come.PST.2SG.REM yesterday FUT see.PST.2SG.REM her.OBL ask.PST.1SG DEF.OBL.M teacher whether FUT come.3SG to.M wedding
	DEF.OBL.M man.OBL.M COMP see.PST.1SG yesterday is here independent declarative (Cristofaro 2013, WALS 128). Romani complement clauses are they probably think.PST.3PL COMP was.1SG I to.M bar onions and cabbage kaj, so, posle, čim, pala kodo COMP drink.PST.1SG much milk FUT become.1SG much strong.M
	introduced by complementizers of the types KAJ and TE (see Matras and Tenser 2016 (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 436) (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 438) ke, akana, jekh kaj, jekh ta (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 411) (b) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 429)
	Similarly, in (47a), no resumption appears where the relative pronoun saveske inflects for a recent overview). KAJ (from 'where') is also used for relative clauses. TE can Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 460) me kamav te voj žaltar me lake phendem te čjinol gljive purum Manipulation and purpose clauses in Romani generally show similar complementation causal relations cause, reason, explanation kaj, kǝ/ke, vajl, anda kodo ke, (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 423) te avilanas aračji dikhlanas la phučljom mire učiteljostar či avela pro
	for case, while in (47b) resumption carrying case marking accompanies the uninflected probably be linked to an Old Indo-Aryan correlative function (Matras 2002, p.180) and von gndosardine kaj sem me ando birto I want.1SG COMP she go_away.3SG I her.DAT tell.PST.1SG COMP buy.3SG mushrooms onions strategies (see section 4.3). sostar, soske, sar, adake sar, ako pjav but thud avava zuralo COMP come.PST.2SG.REM yesterday see.PST.2SG.REM her.OBL ask.PST.1SG my.OBL.M teacher.ABL whether come.3SG.FUT to.M
	using relativizer/complementiser ka: also introduces conditional clauses. KAJ introduces complements portraying factual they think.PST.3PL COMP was.1SG I in.M bar sebepi kaj, afu, jati, zere, bo, if drink.1SG many milk become.FUT.1SG strong.M
	(c) East Slovak Romani, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 436) taj šax 4.3 Adverbial clauses (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 411) bijav	mer, jer, lebo, pošto
	(47) 'This is the boy who I gave the money to.' East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 460) kamav hoj te džal khere and cabbage purpose (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 423) te bi avehas tajsa wedding	ta	te/ti, kaj te, hot te, kǝ te, ja te, bi la
	(a) Kaldaraš, Romania (RMS, RO-008, 813) mišljinde peske hoj som want.1SG COMP COMP go.INF home te pijava but thud avava COMP COND come.2SG.REM yesterday CORR COND her.OBL and(r)e karčma či te zoralji
	kadoa sy o think.PST.3PL REFL.DAT COMP is.1SG in.M raklo saves-ke (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 438) other negative circumstance COMP drink.FUT.1SG many milk become.FUT.1SG strong.F dem love bar bi te, oni te (c) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 429)
	this.M is DEF.NOM.M boy REL.OBL-DAT gave.1SG money (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 436) phendžom lake hoj te cinel hubi ('without') dikhehas bučom o profesares te vela pe	bijap
	TE is used for non-factual events. Agent control and manipulative intent of the agent are kamdomys kej te otdžał juv tell.PST.1SG her.DAT COMP COMP buy.INF mushrooms (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 423) see.2SG.REM ask.PST.1SG DEF.M teacher.OBL.M COMP come.3SG to.OBL.M wedding
	(b) Nea Smirni Romani, Greece (RMS, GR-032, 813) relevant aspects in manipulation clauses involving a manipulator (the agent of the wan.PST.1SG.REM COMP COMP go.INF he Boretzky (1993b) notes that Romani dialects distinguish conditional clauses based on ho pjava but thud to vava zurało
	oduva o modal verb) and a manipulee (the agent of the complement verb) (see Matras 2002; čhavo ka dinom leh o love cibulja he jarmin the truth-value of the proposition, in particular, between realis and irrealis, similar to COMP drink.FUT.1SG much milk CORR become.FUT.1SG strong.M (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 411)
	this.M DEF.NOM.M boy Matras and Tenser 2016). On the hierarchy of control, we find in some dialects a split COMP gave.1SG him.OBL DEF.M money (e) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 436) onions and cabbage Table 1. Adverbial subordinators in Romani other Balkan languages (cf. Friedman 1985). Examples in (51) illustrate the conditional te vjanas tejsa to ła dyktanas
	between the plain use of TE and a combination of TE and a 'reinforcer', often KAJ, in kamau ti džal u vek conditional condition (realis and irrealis) te, bi/by, ako, -se, kana, kada, clauses for realis from the main dialectal groups in the RMS samples. Most conditional Examples in (52) illustrate that TE shows greater stability in irrealis conditional clauses, COMP come.PST.2SG.REM yesterday CORR her.OBL see.PST.SG.REM
	the combination kaj te etc. (see Matras and Tenser 2016), especially with different-want.1SG COMP go.3SG to away (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 438) an te clauses are introduced by the subordinator TE. Some dialects exhibit variation with supplemented in some dialects by borrowed conditional particles, as in Eastern Slovak
	a) Kaldaraš, Romania (RMS, RO-008, 809) 4.2 Complement clauses subject manipulation or weak manipulative power or intent: phendom łake te kineł gžyby potential condition ('whether') te, ob te, či/čy, dali, li, mi purom i armen borrowed subordinators such as ako (from Slavic), as in (51b) from the Kalderaš Romani bi in (52c): Potential condition ('whether') is often expressed by TE, as in (53c) for Sinti, though as
	o tell.PST.1SG her.DAT COMP buy.INF mushrooms onions and cabbage manuš savo dikhljam les arači concessive condition ('even if') vi te, nina te, kajk te variety, while Polska Roma shows ho 'what', which has been generalized as an the other examples in (53) show there is a strong tendency to use borrowed particles in
	DEF.NOM.M man irrealis concession ('as if') REL see.PST.1PL him.OBL yesterday har/sar te, hata kaj adverbial subordinator, in (51d). this function:

A complement clause functions as a core argument of the matrix verb instead of a NP

(Dixon 2010, pp.370, 380)

. Typical matrix verbs with complement clauses are epistemic verbs, such as 'say', 'see', 'know', and manipulation verbs, such as 'want', 'ask', 'tell'. events, with an independent truth-value, whereas TE introduces non-factual or modal events, with no independent truth-value. This mirrors a distinction found in the Balkan languages.

[START_REF] Friedman | Balkan Romani modality and other Balkan languages[END_REF]

discusses te in the context of what he calls the 'Dental Modal Subordinator' of the Balkan languages whose primary function is to denote ontologically non-real events (Balkan Slavic da, Albanian të, Romanian să, Greek na).

In several dialects, the complementizer KAJ has been replaced by borrowed functional equivalents: Vlax kǝ/ke from Romanian; Arli and Greek Vlax oti from Greek; Central Romani hod/hodž/hod'/hot/hoj from Hungarian.

Romani adverbial clauses are generally finite, that is, the verbs in the subordinate clause are marked for person and number. They are introduced by various adverbial subordinators, which derive from grammaticalised inherited items as well as borrowings, and occupy the initial position in the subordinating clause. Table

1

presents an overview of the Romani adverbial subordinators.

  Some dialects show two separate conjunctions for anteriority, corresponding to the degree of presupposition: e.g., in Lovari angla kodo ke avilo 'before he arrived', and angla kodo te avel 'before he arrives'. Other dialects assign anteriority ('before') and anterior-durative ('until') to one of the two groups (i.e., dži kaj or dži te for 'until').Cause, reason, and explanation are expressed with the complementizer KAJ, as in (55b)for Kalderaš, or with case-marked interrogatives, usually in the dative or ablative, such as soske 'because' (lit. 'for-what') in (55a) for Arli, or else with a borrowed conjunction As illustrated in the previous section, Romani subordinate clauses are predominantly finite. Indeed, an inherited infinitive was most likely lost through contact with Iranian languages and, in particular, through contact with Greek and other Balkan languages, which all exhibit loss of the infinitive. The so-called 'new infinitive'(Boretzky 1996a) that can be noted in several dialects probably emerged after the migration from the Balkans to Northern and Western Europe under the influence of infinitives in the contact languages. New infinitives are found in Sinti, Finnish Romani, Romungro and Romani spoken in Poland, Ukraine and Slovakia. The new infinitive developed from the East Slovak Romani in (61c), and Polish Romani in (61d). Innovative negators are found in some dialects, for example in the Sinti sample in (61e) we note the use of the postposed negator nit (also nicht) from German, and the use of the negator či in the Kalderaš sample in (61b). The independent negator či is generally used in Northern Vlax. It probably started as a negative scalar focus particle 'neither, nor, not even' deriving from the indefinite či, and then became a marker of negative clause coordination, in all likelihood under the influence of Romanian nici … nici (see[START_REF] Elšík | Inherited indefinites in Romani[END_REF]. The negator in is used in Southeastern Vlax (possibly a reduced form of the original negator, later modified through an initial vowel); ni for Southwestern Vlax (possibly a Southern Vlax innovation, which may have merged with the Slavic negators of the surrounding languages ne/nie).In the imperative, most dialects use ma, as shown in (62), for Arli, East Slovak Romani, Polish Romani, and Sinti. In some dialects, as in several Vlax dialects illustrated through the Kalderaš sample in (62b), the negator na has been extended to the imperative, most likely before its replacement by an innovative negator in the indicative, or has been generalized independent of the mood of the verb, e.g., in 1SG shut DEF.F window NEG COMP hear.3SG he us.OBL Several dialects have a unique negator for the third person copula. In the Arli (MK-003) and East Slovak (SK-011) samples one finds the use of nani/nane. In the Kalderaš sample from Serbia, one can observe the more general Vlax negative copula naj < *na hi (NEG is.3SG)[START_REF] Elšík | Modality in Romani[END_REF].

	bešjto in (56c) and in Polish Romani in (56d). This is often sensitive to degree of control and andre furo 4.4 Non-finite forms In a Romani variety from Ukraine, the infinitive has the form of a present subjunctive (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 344b) (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 367)
	live.PTCP.M in.OBL.M town subject identity across the two clauses: without the final consonant: na džinav čhavale ma javen	xoljamen
	a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 623) NEG know.1SG friends.VOC NEG become.IMP.PL angry
	koga injumine terno (56) 'I opened the window so that I can hear you.' živindum ko (59) Servi, Ukraine (RMS, UKR-004, 754)	baro	kher ki	dis
	when was.1SG young.M live.PST.1SG in.M big.M house in.F town vov ačhel te tire buti (e) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 344b) (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 367)
	(a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 443) he begin.3SG COMP do.INF work džinau nit mire čhave ma denervinen	tomenge
	(b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 623) phadum o žami 'He begins to work.' know.1SG NEG my children NEG be_angry.IMP.PL you.2PL.DAT te šaj te	havav	tu
	kana semas open.PST.1SG DEF.NOM.M window COMP can COMP hear.1SG you terno traisardem ande jekh baro kher
	when was.1SG young.M live.PST.1SG in.OBL.M INDF big.M house Romani makes use of gerunds as converbs in -indoj for simultaneity or cause: (e) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 367)
	(b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 443) mra māla ma aven		xojmen
	ande in.OBL.M INDF town jekh foro (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 623) sar somas cikno bešavas andro jekh how was.1SG young.M live.PST.1SG in.M INDF big.M house baro kher andro foros in.M town (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 623) hyr homys terno to homys andre baro how was.1SG young.M CORR was.1SG in.OBL.M big.M house khir and calquing. (55) 'I went home because I was tired.' (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 462) gelum khere soske injumine umorno went.1SG home what.DAT was.1SG tired.M (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 462) me gelem khere kaj semas hičjino I went.1SG home COMP was.1SG tired.M For purpose clauses, most dialects use the complementizer TE. Some dialects combine me putardem e feljastra I open.PST.1SG DEF.OBL.F window te šaj te ašunav tu COMP can COMP hear.1SG you (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 443) phundradžom e bloka hoj tut te šunav open.PST.1SG DEF.OBL.F window COMP you.OBL COMP hear.1SG (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 443) phiradom okna kej tot te šjonav open.PST.1SG window COMP you.OBL COMP hear.1SG historical present tense personal markers following loss of person agreement; see (57) for a generalised second person singular form in -(e)s and in (58) for the third person singular in -(e)l. (57) East Finnish Romani, Finland (RMS, FIN-008, 754) jou pyrjylä ceer-es putti he begins do-INF work 'He begins to work.' (58) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-002, 345b) na kamav te dža-l andro foros NEG want.1SG COMP go-INF in.M town 'I do not want to go to town.' (60) Mexican Vlax, Mexico (RMS, MX-001, 961) rovindoj bešli paša amende cry.GER sat.F next us.LOC 'Crying she sat down next to us.' 5. Negation Clausal negation in Romani is expressed through verb negators and negative indefinites. The most distinctive feature of Romani verb negators is that they are sensitive to the mood of the verb. Most Romani dialects have separate negators for indicative and non-indicative, while some dialects also have distinct negators for indicative, subjunctive, and imperative clauses. Most dialects use the negator na for the indicative, as can be seen for Arli in (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 344b) na džanava NEG know.1SG (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 344b) me či žanav I NEG know.1SG (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 344b) na džanav Ukrainian Central Romani (Benišek 2017, p.397). (62) 'Friends, don't get angry (at me).' (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 367) amałalen ma hołanen friends.VOC NEG be_upset.IMP.PL (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 367) xanamika na len xoli pe mande my.PL friends NEG become.IMP.PL angry In the subjunctive, the negator can be the same as either the indicative or the imperative negator: (63) 'I (will) shut the window so that he can't hear us.' (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 444) ka phandavo o žami te na havol amen ov FUT shut.1SG DEF.M window COMP NEG hear.3SG us he (b) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 444) kerjom cu i fenstra ma ti šunel u men (61a), (61) 'I don't know.' NEG know.1SG friends NEG take.IMP.PL anger on me.LOC do.PST.
	KAJ or a borrowed functional equivalent with TE as can be seen in East Slovak Romani

  a) Lithuanian Romani (RMS, 966) In most dialects, the R-like argument used for source is generally expressed with the ablative case; see example in (68a). Lithuanian Romani is an exception: the locative case is used, as in (68b), sometimes in variation with the ablative which is currently being replaced by the locative more generally (see Tenser 2005 for more details; see Matras 1999a on a comparable development in the Polska Roma dialect). PST.1SG DEM flower.PL my.OBL sister.OBL.F.LOC The Romani comitative marker encoding accompaniment, and the instrumental marker, encoding the instrument used for an action, are the same, as in other European language (see Stolz, Stroh, and Urdze 2013, WALS 52). Example in (69) illustrates the use of a comitative, relying on the instrumental case marker -ca, and example in (70) illustrates the use of an instrumental, with the same case. PST.3SG chicken.OBL.F knife.OBL.F.INS 'He killed the chicken with a knife.'For clausal possession, Romani uses the verb 'to be' and encodes the possessor in the oblique; see examples in (71) (for adnominal possession see section 2). This is most likely a relic of the genitive origin of the oblique case in Middle Indo-Aryan. In Balkan dialects of Romani, the possessor in the oblique case may be reduplicated; see an example from Arli in (71a).

	(b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 851) mo nak dukhala
	vo mekla my.M nose hurt.3SG kado	xabe	pala tute
	he leave.PST.3SG this.M	food	for 2SG.LOC
	manuša den man.PL give.3PL priest.OBL.M.DAT some food rašaske nabut xaben (b) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 966) o manuša den o rašajes DEF.PL man.PL give.3PL DEF.M priest.OBL.M food xaben (67) 'He left this food for you (sg) and your brothers.' (a) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 851) jop mukjas kao xaben vaš tuke ti vaš te he leave.PST.3SG this.M food for 2SG.DAT and for your.PL phralenge thaj pala čjire phrala and for your.PL brother.PL (68) 'I got these flowers from my sister.' (a) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-065, 479) kae bluma jom fun mr phenjatar DEM.PL flower.PL take.PST.1SG from my sister.OBL.F.ABL (b) Lithuanian Romani, Lithuania (RMS, LT-005, 479) mǝ lyjom da kvjaty mre pxenjate I geljom ando foro mire duje phralenca went.1SG in.M town my.OBL.PL two.OBL brother.OBL.PL.INS 'I went to town with my two brothers.' (70) Central Slovak Romani, Slovakia (RMS, SK-031, 777) murdardža kaxnja čuraha kill.(71) 'She has a brother.' (b) Kalderaš, Serbia (RMS, YU-010, 982) man dukhal o nak me.OBL hurt.3SG DEF.NOM.M nose (c) East Slovak, Slovakia (RMS, SK-011, 982) dukhal man o nakh hurt.3SG me.OBL DEF.NOM.M nose (d) Polska Roma, Poland (RMS, PL-018, 982) man dukhał nakh me.OBL hurt.3SG nose (e) Sinti, Romania (RMS, RO-022, 982) dukhal man u nak hurt.3SG me.OBL DEF.NOM.M nose take.(69) Central Slovak Romani, Slovakia (RMS, SK-031, 483) (f) Russian Roma, Russia (RMS, RUS-003, 982)
	brother.OBL.PL.DAT (a) Arli, Macedonia (RMS, MK-003, 976) mande dukxal o nak
	ła me.LOC hurt.3SG DEF.NOM.M nose isi ła phrał
	she.OBL is she.OBL brother

The recipient-like (R) argument for the 'benefactive' and 'goal' roles is expressed mainly through the dative case marker and a preposition, as in the Sinti sample in (67a), and more rarely through the locative case, as in the example from Kalderaš in (67b).

 (72). Crevels and Bakker (2000) note that some dialects follow case marking from their contact languages. For example, Russian Roma use the locative case and Latvian Romani uses the dative; see (72f) and (72g) respectively. Finally, Arli illustrates a case of so-called internal possession, (72a In contrast, the ablative case codes separative localisations, e.g., 'out of', 'from', 'from the top of', and a number of peripheral localisations, e.g., 'across, over', 'around', 'through', 'by'.

The dative case encodes the directive adessive, 'to, toward'. The instrumental case encodes the perlative, 'through', in particular in dialects that are in contact with Slavic. In the Central Romani dialects, instrumental may also code the sequentive 'along'.

In most adpositional NPs, we note variation between the use of nominative case, and oblique cases such as locative, accusative, or ablative case (for further details on 'nominative vs. oblique split' see Elšik and Matras 2006, p.247). The choice between these cases depends on prominence hierarchies: oblique cases are preferred with pronouns.

Several South Balkan dialects have developed a general local adposition from the adessive ke/te that combines with a more specialized adposition. These complex adpositions generally combine with the nominative case, whereas the simple adpositions combine with the oblique cases. Finally, anterior and posterior sequence relations, 'before' and 'after', are coded through the spatial adpositions angle/anglal and pal/palal respectively.

Conclusion

In this chapter we presented an overview of selected syntactic-typological features of Romani. We showed that Romani, an Indic language, exhibits a number of features that have been shaped through contact with non-Indic languages during the past millennium.

For example, Romani exhibits nominative-accusative and neutral case alignment, whereas morphological ergative alignment is found in many Indic languages and can be reconstructed for Proto-Romani [START_REF] Bubeník | Was Proto-Romani an ergative language?[END_REF][START_REF] Matras | Romani: a linguistic introduction[END_REF].

Innovations of the