The target article is an insightful and interesting paper, raising many issues, which go far beyond its major focus – animacy effects in differential case marking (DCM). The authors (henceforth: dS&dH) claim that animacy can be shifted in a context, but the triggering contexts and effects are different. They also provide an interesting perspective on semantic shifts integrating insights from semantic and typological literature. I need to state from the outset, that on most points I am in complete agreement with dS&dH. This is perhaps to be expected because the approach to DCM reported in this paper, has been developed within the Animacy Project at the University of Nijmegen led by Helen de Hoop, in which I took part. So many ideas have been developed in discussions with Helen, Peter and others (see, e.g., De Hoop and Malchukov 2007; De Hoop and Malchukov 2008; Malchukov 2008; De Swart 2007; Malchukov and de Swart 2008). Some aspects of this approach are not explicitly presented in this paper, although some issues are touched upon in passing, and knowledge of some other seems to be presupposed. Therefore, it may be worthwhile to summarize it briefly here. The adopted approach to (differential) case marking seeks to explain the patterns of case marking and their variation through interaction of two basic constraints (or constraints families), distinguishability/markedness and indexing (or role coding). On this approach, the pattern of DOM may either be attributed to distinguishability (the need to mark an animate object in order to disambiguate it from the subject), or indexing (marking a more prominent patient), or else by convergence of both factors. On either account, the relation of animacy to case is

中文翻译：

---

动画的转移和语义冲突的解决：de Swart和de Hoop的《转移动画》的类型学评论

目标文章是一篇有见地且有趣的论文，提出了许多问题，远远超出了其主要重点–差异案例标记（DCM）中的动画效果。作者（以下简称dS＆dH）声称，可以在上下文中改变生气，但是触发的上下文和效果是不同的。他们还提供了有关语义转换的有趣观点，这些语义转换整合了来自语义和类型学文献的见解。我需要从一开始就指出，在大多数方面，我与dS＆dH完全同意。这可能是意料之中的，因为本文所报告的DCM方法是在我参与了Helen de Hoop领导的奈梅亨大学的Animacy项目中开发的。在与海伦（Helen），彼得（Peter）等人的讨论中，已经提出了许多想法（例如，参见De Hoop和Malchukov 2007；De Hoop和Malchukov，2008年；马尔楚科夫2008；De Swart 2007；Malchukov and de Swart 2008）。尽管顺便提及了一些问题，但似乎还以其他知识为前提，但本文并未明确介绍此方法的某些方面。因此，在这里简要总结一下可能是值得的。所采用的（差异）案例标记方法试图通过两个基本约束（或约束族），可区分性/标记性和索引（或角色编码）的相互作用来解释案例标记的模式及其变化。在这种方法上，DOM的模式可以归因于可区分性（需要标记一个有生命的对象以便将其与对象区别开来），索引（标记一个更加突出的患者），或者归因于两个因素的融合。无论使用哪种帐户，