English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Compared to a general study by Shannon (2003), my case study suggests that the loss of object preposing in Drenthe happened a good deal earlier than indicated by Shannon. This may imply that the material in Shannon represents an average of the Dutch dialect areas, which brings into relief the need for a more fine-grained study of the various Dutch dialect areas.1 Alternative explanations for the difference between the two studies will be discussed. This paper moreover investigates the effect of the grammatical and semantic status of the NPs involved in the diachronic development of object fronting, e.g. whether the preposed element and the subject are full NPs or pronouns. I will discuss the loss of the case system as a possible factor for the loss of object fronting.

Object preposing in 15th century Drenthe