E. van Lier

An implicational map of parts of speech

In this paper we present a two-dimensional implicational map of parts of speech. We show that this map constitutes an improvement with respect to the one-dimensional parts of speech hierarchy originally proposed in Hengeveld (1992) in terms of typological adequacy. In addition, our map is an innovation in relation to traditional semantic maps since it is implicational in nature and since the typological implications it contains are hierarchically ordered with respect to one another. Finally, our proposal shows that the analytical primitives underlying map models need not be exclusively semantic in nature, but may also include other dimensions, in this case pragmatic ones.

Flexible word classes: typological studies of underspecified parts of speech

This book is the first major cross-linguistic study of ‘flexible words’, i.e. words that cannot be classified in terms of the traditional lexical categories Verb, Noun, Adjective or Adverb. This is because flexible words can -without special morphosyntactic marking- serve in functions for which other languages must employ members of two or more of the four traditional, ‘specialised’ word classes. Thus, flexible words are underspecified for communicative functions like ‘predicating’ (verbal function), ‘referring’ (nominal function) or ‘modifying’ (a function typically associated with adjectives and e.g. manner adverbs). Even though languages with flexible word classes have been know to exist for more than a century, the phenomenon of lexical flexibility has not played a role in the development of linguistic typology or modern grammatical theory. The current volume aims to remedy this situation by offering ten detailed studies on lexical word classes, investigating their properties and what it means for the grammar of a language to have such a word class. Each contributor to this volume is an expert on lexical flexibility, either because the author has studied lexical flexibility in a particular language, or because (s)he has investigated flexible word classes across languages. Furthermore, this collection of articles provides a variety of theoretical perspectives on the phenomenon of lexical flexibility. The book shows that the recognition and study of flexible words adds significantly to our understanding of the nature of human language and its place in human cognition.

Flexible word classes in linguistic typology and grammatical theory

This book is the first major cross-linguistic study of ‘flexible words’, i.e. words that cannot be classified in terms of the traditional lexical categories Verb, Noun, Adjective or Adverb. This is because flexible words can -without special morphosyntactic marking- serve in functions for which other languages must employ members of two or more of the four traditional, ‘specialised’ word classes. Thus, flexible words are underspecified for communicative functions like ‘predicating’ (verbal function), ‘referring’ (nominal function) or ‘modifying’ (a function typically associated with adjectives and e.g. manner adverbs). Even though languages with flexible word classes have been know to exist for more than a century, the phenomenon of lexical flexibility has not played a role in the development of linguistic typology or modern grammatical theory. The current volume aims to remedy this situation by offering ten detailed studies on lexical word classes, investigating their properties and what it means for the grammar of a language to have such a word class. Each contributor to this volume is an expert on lexical flexibility, either because the author has studied lexical flexibility in a particular language, or because (s)he has investigated flexible word classes across languages. Furthermore, this collection of articles provides a variety of theoretical perspectives on the phenomenon of lexical flexibility. The book shows that the recognition and study of flexible words adds significantly to our understanding of the nature of human language and its place in human cognition.

Referential effects on the expression of three-participant events across languages: an introduction in memory of Anna Siewierska

Introduction to special issue on Referential Effects on the Expression of Three-Participant Events across Languages.

Parts-of-speech systems and dependent clauses: A typological study

Abstract This paper investigates the degree of parallelism between the distribution of parts-of-speech classes in a language, and the distribution of dependent clause types in that language. It is hypothesized that languages with parts-of-speech classes that are specialized for a certain syntactic function have dependent clause types that are also confined to a single function. Conversely, in languages with a class of lexical items that is not specialized for a single function, but can rather be used in two or more functions, the same functional flexibility is expected in the domain of dependent clauses. These predictions are tested on a pilot sample of 12 languages, each with a different parts-of-speech system. For languages with functionally specialized parts-of-speech classes the results are as expected: their dependent clauses are also specialized. The languages with flexible parts-of-speech systems partly support the hypothesis: as expected, they have dependent clause types that can be used in more than one function. However, the distribution of these flexible constructions is not exactly the same as the distribution of the flexible parts-of-speech classes. Furthermore, in addition to flexible dependent clause types, languages with flexible parts-of-speech systems have functionally specialized dependent clause types. The results are interpreted as indicative of the interdependency between lexical and morphosyntactic typology.

Argument coding in nominalizations of Central-Eastern Oceanic languages

This study investigates the marking of S, A, and P arguments in (unmarked) syntactic nominalizations of 28 Central-Eastern Oceanic languages with possessive systems that formally distinguish alienable from inalienable possession. First, we consider differential possessive marking of arguments. We find that in the majority of sample languages agents (A and/or SA arguments) can take inalienable marking. This pattern contradicts a standardly invoked account of differential possessive marking, based on the semantic factor of control, which holds that agents take alienable marking. Instead, we account for the distribution of inalienable possessive marking in terms of a hierarchy of argument types. This hierarchy is motivated by a relative rather than an absolute effect of control, in interaction with transitivity. Moreover, a number of additional factors may co-determine the choice of possessive agent marking. Second, we adress the distribution and alignment of possessive as opposed to sentential argument marking in nominalizations. We compare our findings with the world-wide typology of argument marking in nominalizations, and with main clause alignment patterns. We find that S and A arguments may take possessive marking independently of alignment in main clauses of individual languages. We attribute this finding to the referential properties shared between agents and prototypical possessors.

Referential hierarchies in three-participant constructions in Blackfoot: the effects of animacy, person, and specificity

This paper discusses alignment patterns in three-participant constructions in Blackfoot (Western Algonquian; Canada, USA). We demonstrate the effects of referential hierarchies relating to animacy, person and specificity. Blackfoot verbs stem are subcategorized for transitivity and the animacy of S (for intransitives) and P(atient), R(ecipient), T(heme), or B(eneficiary) (for (di)transitives), showing crossreference with at most two participants. Nonspecific participants are never crossreferenced, resulting in the possibility of constructions with three or even four participants, only one of which is crossreferenced on the verb. Even when all participants in a three-participant construction are specific, only two can be crossreferenced on the verb: the A and what is generally called the ‘primary object’ in Algonquian studies (T, R or B depending on the specific stem in question). Any remaining participants are not crossreferenced on the verb, irrespective of their specificity status. Whether T, R or B is chosen to be the primary object is lexically determined by the verbal stem, and more in particular by the so-called ‘final’, a derivational morpheme which closes every verb stem in Blackfoot. While Algonquian languages are often thought to display only secundative alignment, in line with the overwhelming importance of animacy in their grammars, we show that some stems require indirective alignment, while others allow for both configurations. Cross-referencing of A and B occurs as a result of applicativization with a benefactive final, which downgrades any potentially present T and/or R participants to noncrossreferenced objects. Finally, Blackfoot allows for a form of marking additional participants by a preverbal element called a ‘relative root’, which licenses a participant without influencing crossreferencing patterns and without indicating the specificity or animacy of the licensed participant.