Typological studies in langugage

Benefactives and Malefactives Typological Studies in Language (TSL) A companion series to the journal Studies in Language Volumes in this series are functionally and typologically oriented, covering specific topics in language by collecting together data from a wide variety of languages and language typologies Editor Spike Gildea University of Oregon Editorial Board Balthasar Bickel John Haiman Marianne Mithun Bernard Comrie Martin Haspelmath Doris L Payne Denis Creissels Bernd Heine Franz Plank William Croft Paul J Hopper Anna Siewierska Nicholas Evans Andrej A Kibrik Dan I Slobin Carol Genetti František Lichtenberk Sandra A Thompson Leipzig Leipzig / Santa Barbara Lyon Albuquerque Canberra Santa Barbara St Paul Leipzig Köln Pittsburgh Moscow Auckland Santa Barbara Eugene, OR Konstanz Lancaster Berkeley Santa Barbara Volume 92 Benefactives and Malefactives Typological perspectives and case studies Edited by Fernando Zúñiga and Seppo Kittilä Benefactives and Malefactives Typological perspectives and case studies Edited by Fernando Zúñiga University of Zurich Seppo Kittilä University of Helsinki John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam / Philadelphia TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Benefactives and malefactives : typological perspectives and case studies / edited by Fernando Zúñiga, Seppo Kittilä p cm (Typological Studies in Language, issn 0167-7373 ; v 92) Includes bibliographical references and index Grammar, Comparative and general Benefactive constructions Grammar, Comparative and general Case Case grammar I Zúñiga, Fernando II Kittilä, Seppo P291.27.B46  2010 415 dc22 2010000735 isbn 978 90 272 0673 (Hb ; alk paper) isbn 978 90 272 8831 (Eb) © 2010 – John Benjamins B.V No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher John Benjamins Publishing Co · P.O Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa Table of contents Preface List of contributors Introduction Benefaction and malefaction from a cross-linguistic perspective Seppo Kittilä & Fernando Zúñiga Benefactive applicative periphrases: A typological approach Denis Creissels Cross-linguistic categorization of benefactives by event structure: A preliminary framework for benefactive typology Tomoko Yamashita Smith vii ix 29 71 An areal and cross-linguistic study of benefactive and malefactive constructions Paula Radetzky & Tomoko Smith 97 The role of benefactives and related notions in the typology of purpose clauses Karsten Schmidtke-Bode 121 Benefactive and malefactive uses of Salish applicatives Kaoru Kiyosawa & Donna B Gerdts 147 Beneficiaries and recipients in Toba (Guaycurú) Marisa Censabella 185 Benefactive and malefactive applicativization in Mapudungun Fernando Zúñiga 203 The benefactive semantic potential of ‘caused reception’ constructions: A case study of English, German, French, and Dutch Timothy Colleman 219 Beneficiary coding in Finnish Seppo Kittilä 245 Benefactives in Laz René Lacroix 271 Benefactive and malefactive verb extensions in the Koalib verb system Nicolas Quint 295  Benefactives and Malefactives Benefactives and malefactives in Gumer (Gurage) Sascha Völlmin A “reflexive benefactive” in Chamba-Daka (Adamawa branch, Niger-Congo family) Raymond Boyd 317 331 Beneficiary and other roles of the dative in Tashelhiyt Christian J Rapold 351 Benefactive strategies in Thai Mathias Jenny 377 Korean benefactive particles and their meanings Jae Jung Song 393 Malefactivity in Japanese Eijiro Tsuboi 419 Index 437 Preface This article collection originated in the Workshop on the Typology of Benefactives and Malefactives we organized and held October 25–26, 2007 in Zurich We would like to thank the Hochschulstiftung of the University of Zurich for providing financial support to the workshop After learning from the late Mickey Noonan that he was interested in such an article collection for the Benjamins series Typological Studies in Language, we received the papers from the contributors and embarked on the editorial process, which is invariably time-consuming but sometimes—as in this case—very rewarding We were fortunate enough to be able to interest Masayoshi Shibatani in this project, and he assisted us as guest editor despite his many commitments and extensive traveling during the period Not only did we benefit from his experience and knowledge, but his expertise in benefactives also made him an invaluable collaborator We are greatly indebted to Matt for his help, particularly considering the fact that some of the articles even take issue with him on specific analytical decisions Matt’s assistance notwithstanding, it is we who are responsible for any remaining shortcomings of the present volume, of course    Fernando Zúñiga Seppo Kittilä Eugene and Helsinki, 2009 List of contributors Raymond Boyd Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique UMR 8135 : Langage, Langues et Cultures d’Afrique Noire 7, rue Guy Môquet 94801 VILLEJUIF Cedex France boyd@vjf.cnrs.fr Marisa Censabella Universidad Nacional del Nordeste, Argentina Instituto de Investigaciones Geohistóricas — CONICET López y Planes 636 (3500) Resistencia Provincia del Chaco Argentina mcensabella@gmail.com mcensabella@bib.unne.edu.ar Timothy Colleman Ghent University Dutch Linguistics Department Blandijnberg B-9000 Gent Belgium timothy.colleman@UGent.be Denis Creissels DDL-ISH 14 avenue Berthelot 69363 Lyon cedex O7 France denis.creissels@univ-lyon2.fr Donna Gerdts 2563 W 7th Ave Vancouver, BC V6K 1Y8 Canada gerdts@sfu.ca Mathias Jenny Seminar für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Plattenstrasse 54 8032 Zürich Switzerland jenny@spw.uzh.ch Seppo Kittilä General Linguistics P.O.Box 24 00014 University of Helsinki Finland kittila@mappi.helsinki.fi Kaoru Kiyosawa 7-2-5 Toshima, Kita-ku Tokyo 114-0003 Japan kkiyosaw@alumni.sfu.ca René Lacroix 328, rue de Belleville 75020 Paris France lacroix_r@hotmail.com Nicolas Quint LLACAN-CNRS rue Guy Môquet 94-801 Villejuif-Cédex France quint@vjf.cnrs.fr Paula Radetzky Department of Linguistics 101, Section Kuang-Fu Road, Hsinchu, 30013 Taiwan paula.radetzky@gmail.com  Benefactives and Malefactives Christian Rapold Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics PO Box 310 6500 AH Nijmegen The Netherlands Christian.Rapold@mpi.nl Karsten Schmidtke-Bode Friedrich Schiller University Jena Department of English and American Studies English Linguistics: Language and Cognition (Chair: Prof Dr Holger Diessel) Ernst-Abbe-Platz 07743 Jena Germany karsten.schmidtke@uni-jena.de Tomoko Yamashita Smith Advisement Office for International Students Graduate School of Engineering Osaka University 2-1 Yamada-oka, Suita Osaka 565-0871 Japan tsmith@sannet.ne.jp Jae Jung Song Linguistics Programme University of Otago, P.O Box 56 Dunedin 9054 New Zealand jaejung.song@stonebow.otago.ac.nz Eijiro Tsuboi Department of Language and Information Sciences Graduate School of Arts and Sciences University of Tokyo, Komaba 3-8-1 Meguro, Tokyo 153-8902 Japan e-tsuboi@boz.c.u-tokyo.ac.jp Sascha Völlmin Universität Zürich Seminar für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Plattenstrasse 54 CH-8032 Zürich Switzerland sascha.voellmin@access.uzh.ch Fernando Zúñiga Seminar für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft Plattenstrasse 54 8032 Zürich Switzerland fernando.zuniga@spw.uzh.ch Malefactivity in Japanese  (25) Taro-wa kyooshi-ni musuko-o home-rare-ta Taro-top teacher-dat son-acc praise-pass-pst ‘The teacher praised Taro’s son (and the education and parental guidance Taro had given to his son, making Taro feel proud and happy).’ (26) Watashi-wa miyage-o taisoo yorokob-are-ta I-top souvenir-acc very.much like-pass-pst ‘They liked my souvenir very much (and thanked me).’ (Kuno 1983) These examples show that if the passive subject is the actual target of the action, the retained-object passive can be semantically neutral even when the retained object is not a body part noun When we turn back to (17), (18), and (19), we realize that they differ from the examples we have just seen, most clearly (25) and (26), in that the target of the action expressed in each sentence is the body part, not its possessor If it is the case that when the subject is the actual target of the action, the retained-object passive is semantically neutral, then, this leads us to a kind of contrapositive inference that when a retained-object passive sentence is adversative in meaning, the subject is actually not directly affected, even when the accusative noun phrase is a body part expression This means that direct involvement in the event does not necessarily lead to a neutral interpretation, and even when the possessor of a body part is factually involved in the action done to it, the possessor may not be presented as directly affected in the same way that the subject of an ordinary, neutral passive sentence is, and in this sense, we may say that even body parts can be treated like alienably possessed items in the Japanese retained-object passive But this in turn leaves the neutral readings in (20), (21), and (22) unaccounted for, and in order to understand the reason for their neutrality, we need to look at the ambiguous status of body parts In one sense body parts are integral parts of us, but in another sense, they are our possessions, things belonging to our personal sphere, which we manipulate to various things, like using our hands to pick up a book from a desk Therefore, when seen through the eyes of a detached, outside observer, an action done to a body part of a person can be seen as an action done to the person, based on the physical unity of the body part and the person, but from the perspective of the person in question, the ego is separate from the body as the locus of consciousness, and monitors, as it were, what happens to his body From this perspective, body parts are grouped together with other things in his personal sphere, conceptually distinct from the ego So, if body parts as expressed in retained-object passive sentences can be considered to be more or less on a par with regular alienable possessions, then it is no wonder that sentences like (17), (18), and (19) are adversative, for the same reason that adversative passive sentences like (2) are adversative in meaning Thus, an adversative reading and a neutral reading are both potentially possible, and the question to be asked now is, what determines the preferred reading in each sentence In order to answer this question, we need to think about the function of the  Eijiro Tsuboi Japanese passive Although much more detail is obviously necessary to fully characterize it, we can safely say that it is a marked construction employed to put the affectee in focus and describe what happens to the affectee as a result of the action denoted by the verb phrase This inherent affectee-orientedness is further reinforced when the event is perfective, as in cases like (17), (18), and (19) which have a past tense marker -ta As DeLancey (1981) points out, whereas the imperfective aspect is employed to present the event as one which is to be completed by an actor, and therefore A-oriented, the perfective aspect serves to focus on the result of the process which is usually realized in the patient, and thus P-oriented Thus, it is quite natural for the result or change to be foregrounded in a perfective passive sentence, thereby leading the hearer or the reader to incorporate the viewpoint of the passive subject, from whose perspective an action to the body part is not an action to himself but to his possession, resulting in an adversative interpretation However, when the verb is in the imperfective, what is highlighted is not the result, which is yet to be gained since the event is not completed, but the ongoing process of something being done to a body part of the passive subject, which can be observed and described solely from an external viewpoint, free from the need to incorporate the passive subject’s feelings As we have seen, when the event is described from an external viewpoint, the passive subject and the body part are not particularly conceptually distinguished, and this leads to the interpretation that the passive subject is directly involved and affected in the event of something being done to his body part Since the passive subject is directly affected, there is no need to evoke an adversative reading, and sentences like (20), (21), and (22) can receive neutral interpretations 5. Context-dependent adversative sense and contextually understood affectee In the previous section, we saw how adversative sense appears or disappears in retained-object passive sentences depending on whether the subject is construed as directly affected or not, but even in those cases in which the passive subject is unambiguously the direct target of the action, adversative interpretations can sometimes arise in still another type of Japanese passive, exemplified by (27) and (28).8 8.  This type of passive with an unexpressed affectee was first pointed out by Masuoka (1991) If the dative agent marker -ni is replaced with -niyotte, these sentences are acceptable as neutral passive sentences; see Footnote The subject of this type of passive often takes the nominative marker -ga, instead of the topic marker -wa, probably because an unexpressed affectee can most easily be taken to be the overall (though hidden) subject of predication when there is no other candidate competing for a topic status Malefactivity in Japanese  (27) Tsumetakunatteita ryouri-ga/-wa tsuma-ni atatamenaos-are-ta gone.cold dish-nom/-top wife-dat reheat-pass-pst (Lit.) ‘The dish which had gone cold was reheated by wife.’ ‘I (or possibly someone else) was annoyed by my (or someone else’s) wife reheating the dish which had gone cold.’ (28) Ie-no tobira-ga/-wa booto-ni nandomo ker-are-ta house-gen door-nom/-top rioters-dat repeatedly kick-pass-pst (Lit.) ‘The door of the house was kicked by rioters repeatedly.’ ‘Someone (associated somehow with the door, possibly the owner of the house) was annoyed by the rioters kicking the door.’ There is one important difference between these sentences and those we have seen so far, and in this type of passive, it is not the subject but some contextually understood person who is adversely affected Since the passive subject is the direct target of the action, these sentences should have neutral interpretations just as their literal English translations do, but actually the adversative interpretations prevail, with varying degrees of acceptability depending on how natural such an adversative construal is.9 It is understandable that such implicit reference to a concealed affectee is evoked to make the sentence conform to the general pattern of the Japanese passive which commonly describes how a human patient is affected, and the adversative interpretation is also expected since the unexpressed person is external to the event (which is why it is not expressed) and can only be construed as being involved in the event as an adversely affected person But what is worth noting here is the fact that when (27) and (28) are turned into converbal subordinate clauses as in (29) and (30), they no longer need to receive adversative interpretations Since the understood affectee is not directly involved in the event, cancellation of adversative connotation here needs a different account from the one given to the neutral readings in (20), (21), and (22) (29) Tsumetakunatteita ryouri-wa tsuma-ni atatamenaos-are-te yugeotate-tei-ta gone.cold dish-top wife-dat reheat-pass-cvb steaming-ipfv-pst ‘The dish which had gone cold, having been reheated by my wife, was steaming again.’ (30) Sono ie-no tobira-wa bouto-ni nandomo ker-are-te the house-gen door-top rioters-dat repeatedly kick-pass-cvb hekon-dei-ta get.dented-ipfv-pst ‘The door of the house, having been kicked by the rioters repeatedly, was dented.’ 9.  This does not change if the subject is a continuing topic in the current discourse, which suggests the inadequacy of the approach which seeks to provide a universal characterization of voice constructions in terms of a semantic map defined by relative salience or topicality of A and P, wherein passive is characterized as a construction with more topical P and less topical A (cf Croft 2001) For a critical discussion of the semantic map approach in general and its application to voice phenomena in particular, see Tsuboi (2008)  Eijiro Tsuboi Japanese has a fairly strong animacy restriction in describing two-participant events, both in the active and the passive, unlike some languages like English where inanimate things or abstract entities can relatively easily assume the subject status in transitive sentences if they are the causes of the events, as in the derailment killed more than one hundred commuters Japanese strongly resists such constructions and prefers to choose a human being as subject, and describes the event in a way comparable to English more than one hundred commuters died because of the derailment, with the focus on the human participant We may say that the readily conferrable causer status of a responsible actor in Japanese transitive sentences we saw in Section as contrasted with the peripheral role given to inanimate “causers” is another facet of the central role played by sentient human beings in linguistic coding of transitive events in Japanese.10 As for the passive, Japanese also exhibits a strong preference to a human subject, and until the time when Japanese developed the ni-yotte-marked passive mentioned in Footnote 3, inanimate passive sentences were generally avoided, and were only possible when they had no dative-marked agent noun phrases and took verbs with resultantstate suffixes (cf Kinsui 1991), which we take to be necessitated to background the otherwise salient human agents Now, returning to the contrast between (27) and (28) on the one hand and (29) and (30) on the other, we notice that the passive clauses of the former sentences have high values with respect to several of Hopper & Thompson’s (1980) transitivity parameters: they are perfective and realis, and are the main, foregrounded clauses Since the adversative sense in the Japanese adversative passive is based on a force-dynamic, highly transitive construal of the event, we may think that it is relatively easily evoked in high transitivity contexts, like the ones in (27) and (28) But when the passive clause is changed into a converbal clause, the clause-final tenseaspect-modality morphemes are stripped away, making it like an English gerund, and the assertive force of the clause is gone as well, significantly lowering the transitivity of the clause When the passive clause is in a low transitivity context, a force-dynamic adversative interpretation need not be evoked, which is why (29) and (30) are neutral in connotation This way of thinking about the fluctuations in interpretation seems to be supported by the fact that other low transitivity factors such as indefiniteness of time reference and a lesser degree of individuation of the participants can also serve the function of suppressing adversative interpretations where they might otherwise be expected Thus, while (31) describes a perfective event involving specific participants and can be accepted only as a sentence implying that someone was somehow adversely affected or maybe chagrined by Poe’s writing of the first detective story, (32) only states the nonexistence of a certain type of novel, with an indefinite agent, and is not adversative 10.  For this point, see Ikegami (1994) Malefactivity in Japanese  in meaning Similarly, (33) is not adversative either, and the agent is generic in reference, and it is not about a specific event and thus indefinite in temporal reference (31) Saishono suirishousetu-wa Edgar.Allan.Poe-ni kak-are-ta first detective.story-top Edgar.Allan.Poe-dat write-pass-pst (Lit.) ‘The first detective story was written by Edgar Allan Poe.’ ‘I (or someone else) was adversely affected by Poe writing the first detective story.’ (32) Sono shuno shousetu-wa koremade darenimo kak-are-tei-nai the kind novel-top so.far by.whoever write-pass-ipfv-neg ‘The kind of novel has never been written by anybody.’ (33) Sono zasshi-wa wakamono-ni yoku yom-are-tei-ru the magazine-top young.people-dat often read-pass-ipfv-prs ‘The magazine is widely read among young people.’ (Tsuboi 2002) 6.  Conclusion The Japanese adversative passive has been grouped together with comparable constructions in other East Asian languages which are used to describe adversative events, but as we saw in Section 2, even the very notion of adversity varies among languages and the mere reference to their shared feature of adversity does not reveal much about them What we need to to tap their potential for providing a promising subject for areal study of East Asian languages is to make finer-grained analyses of individual constructions to clarify the role played by language-particular features and reveal the general mechanisms underlying their adversative semantics and concomitant syntactic behavior such as valency increase This paper attempts to shed new light on malefactivity in Japanese by examining how the adversative interpretation obtains in the Japanese passive constructions, both as a fully grammaticalized constructional meaning and a context-dependent interpretation, as well as what is involved in the valency increase characteristic of the Japanese adversative passive Whereas in the adversative passive the grammaticalization of adversative meaning may have been motivated in part by the requirement of adversity for the integration of an event-external affectee, in the other types of passive constructions with adversative connotations, the passive subject is the target of the action and an adversative interpretation is not particularly expected, but is imposed nonetheless This context-dependent meaning augmentation by the speech act participants, which is often a precursor to a grammaticalization process, is related to the “coolness” (in the sense of Huang 1984 cited in Bisang 1998) of Japanese which tends to expect or require active audience participation, and is encouraged by the requirement of a human affectee for a Japanese passive sentence Also relevant in this connection is the  Eijiro Tsuboi nonfinite subordination pattern (cf Haspelmath & König 1998) of Japanese in cases like (29) and (30), which makes it possible for otherwise adversatively interpreted clauses to be used non-adversatively for the purpose of clause linking Taken together, what we have discussed in this paper points to the importance of viewing adversative constructions in a broader perspective, as something which emerge from the interaction of various factors in the dynamic processes of contextualization and grammaticalization, but further research needs to be conducted on adversative constructions in other languages in order to lay down a solid basis for building a more detailed and clearer picture of the general category of adversative constructions References Bisang, Walter 1998 Adverbiality: The view from the Far East In Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, Johan van der Auwera (ed.), 641–812 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Croft, William 2001 Radical Construction Grammar Oxford: OUP Davies, William D 1995 Javanese adversatives, passives and Mapping Theory Journal of Linguistics 31: 15–51 DeLancey, Scott 1981 An interpretation of split ergativity and related phenomena Language 57: 626–57 Haspelmath, Martin & König, Ekkehard 1998 Concessive conditionals in the languages of Europe In Adverbial Constructions in the Languages of Europe, Johan van der Auwera (ed.), 563–640 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Hopper, Paul & Thompson, Sandra A 1980 Transitivity in grammar and discourse Language 56: 251–299 Huang, C.T James 1984 On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns Linguistic Inquiry 15: 531–574 Ikegami, Yoshihiko 1994 The agent and the sentient: A dissymmetry in linguistic and cultural encoding In Origins of Semiosis, Winifried Nöth (ed.), 325–337 Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter Keenan, Edward L 1985 Passive in the world’s languages In Language Typology and Syntactic Description, Vol 1: Clause Structure, Timothy Shopen (ed.), 243–281 Cambridge: CUP Kim, Kyunghwan 1994 Adversity and retained object passive constructions Japanese/Korean Linguistics 4: 331–346 Kinsui, Satoshi 1991 Judoo bun no rekishi ni tuite no ichi koosatsu Kokugogaku 164: 1–14 Kinsui, Satoshi 1997 The influence of translation on the historical development of the Japanese passive construction Journal of Pragmatics 28: 759–779 Klaiman, M.H 1991 Grammatical Voice Cambridge: CUP Kuno, Susumu 1983 Shin Nihon Bunpoo Kenkyuu Tokyo: Taishukan Masuoka, Takashi 1991 Judoo hyoogen to shukansei In Nihongo no Boisu to Tadoosei, Yoshio Nitta (ed.), 105–121 Tokyo: Kurosio Shibatani, Masayoshi 1985 Passives and related constructions: A prototype analysis Language 61: 821–848 Shibatani, Masayoshi 1994 An integrational approach to possessor raising, ethical datives, and adversative passives BLS 20: 461–486 Malefactivity in Japanese  Shibatani, Masayoshi 2000 Boisu In Nihongo no Bunpoo, I: Bun no Kokkak, Yoshio Nitta, Shinjiro Muraki, Masayoshi Shibatani & Masato Yazawa, 117–186 Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten Siewierska, Anna 1984 The Passive: A Comparative Linguistic Analysis London: Routledge Kegan & Paul Tsuboi, Eijiro 2000 Cognitive models in transitive construal in the Japanese adversative passive In Constructions in Cognitive Linguistics, Ad Foolen & Frederike van der Leek (eds.), 283–300 Amsterdam: John Benjamins Tsuboi, Eijiro 2001 Asymmetry in event construal: Adversativity in epistemic assessment and force dynamics The Proceedings of the First Seoul International Conference on Discourse and Cognitive Linguistics: Perspectives for the 21st Century, 877–889 Seoul: Discourse and Cognitive Linguistic Society of Korea Tsuboi, Eijiro 2002 Jueisei to ukemi In Ninchigengogaku, I: Jishoo Koozoo, Y Nishimura (ed.), 63–86 Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press Tsuboi, Eijiro 2008 Semantic maps and grammatical imagery: Universal and language-specific aspects of grammatical meanings In From Gram to Mind : Grammar as Cognition, Jean-Remi Lapaire, Guillaume Desagulier & Jean-Baptiste Guignard (eds.), 133–145 Bordeaux: Presses Universitaires de Bordeaux Wierzbicka, Anna 1979 Are grammatical categories vague or polysemous? The Japanese ‘adversative’ passive in a typological context Papers in Linguistics 12: 111–162 Index A Actor  59, 205, 207, 225, 248, 378, 422–423, 430, 432 Addressee  60, 221, 227, 324, 326, 355–356, 363, 370, 374 Adjunct  30, 36, 228, 285, 287, 333, 399 Adposition  4–9, 34–35, 38, 50–51, 63, 131, 134, 137, 141, 187, 247 Adversative  5, 90, 99, 101, 113–114, 149, 172–173, 419–434 Affectee  5, 21, 71, 88, 98–99, 102, 115, 216–217, 356, 361–364, 366, 370–371, 385, 390–391, 423–424, 430–431, 433 Affectedness  4, 6, 15–16, 20–22, 25, 32, 99–101, 210, 331, 341–342, 362, 366, 390 Affectedness construction  73, 98–99, 101, 105–106, 114–115 Agent/causer animate  2, 7, 207, 260, 263, 266, 269, 333, 339, 347, 361, 389 inanimate  7, 16, 85, 256, 260–262, 268–269, 333, 342, 347, 358, 361, 380, 422, 432 involuntary  22, 187, 262 Agentive benefactive  75–78, 81, 83–84, 86, 88–89, 91–92 Agreement  26, 149–150, 186, 189, 195–196, 199, 273, 275, 278, 284, 290, 343–344, 351 object agreement  26, 149, 344 Alignment patterns  185–186 Ambiguity  328, 334–335, 337, 388, 401 Ambitransitive verbs  205, 213–215 Animacy of the beneficiary  4, 6, 15–16, 255, 257, 262–264, 266, 268–269, 333, 339 Animacy restriction  432 Applicative  5, 10, 13, 21, 26, 29–37, 40–42, 46–48, 53–57, 60, 62–63, 98, 110, 116, 147–152, 154–179, 186–194, 196–197, 199, 203, 205–206, 208, 210–217, 271–272, 275–285, 287–291, 312, 326, 339, 341, 345–347 redirective  147–154, 156–165, 168–169, 171, 174–175, 177–179 relational  147–149, 165–174, 176, 178–179, 288, 290, 333–335 Areal distribution  97, 116 Auxiliary  40, 42–43, 45, 50, 54, 58, 61, 74–75, 77, 79–81, 88, 100, 115, 140, 148, 218, 394, 398–403, 405, 408, 411–415 Autobenefactive  4, 26, 29, 33, 57–60, 63, 218, 331, 341–342, 346–348, 358 285, 289–290, 295–313, 317–319, 321–323, 327–333, 339–341, 344–348, 357–358, 362, 377–381, 383–385, 387–409, 411–417, 419, 424 direct  2, 90, 255, 267, 376–378, 385, 387, 389–390, 392, 400, 412 double benefactive  314 indirect  2, 21, 137, 171, 206, 209, 361, 377, 379–380, 388–390, 392 Benefactive particle  25, 53, 60, 92, 393–395, 398–406, 408–409, 411–413, 415–417 Benefactive periphrasis  29, 31–33, 42, 44, 47, 49, 57–59, 62–63, 115 Benefactive-recipient  14, 130, 132–133, 135, 222–223, 233–235, 237, 239, 245, 248–249, 255, 307, 378, 384, 396–398, 400, 402–403, 405–406, 408–409 Biclausal constructions  26, 34, 47, 330 Body parts  246, 267, 297, 347, 366–367, 426–430 B Benefactive  2–5, 7, 14, 18, 26–27, 29–35, 37–48, 50–61, 63, 71–93, 97–116, 121–124, 126–129, 132–139, 141–142, 147–150, 152–156, 158–165, 167–170, 174–179, 191–194, 196–197, 199, 203, 209, 216–217, 219, 221–224, 226–237, 239–240, 245–248, 257, 259–261, 263–265, 268, 271–272, 281, C Case  1, 4–5, 7–8, 17–18, 20, 24–25, 62, 98, 104, 115, 124–125, 129, 137–139, 141, 185–186, 189, 240, 246–247, 257–259, 264, 266–268, 274–275, 277–279, 286–287, 352 ablative  5, 7, 20, 115–116, 245–247, 251, 255, 257–258, 261, 264–268, 286–287, 361  Index absolutive  274–275, 279, 285, 287 accusative  5, 25, 97, 219–220, 227–228, 274–275, 299, 426, 428–429 allative  5, 7, 13, 17, 24, 115, 121, 124–135, 191, 245–247, 249–258, 261, 264–269, 287 dative  7, 12, 18, 20–27, 62, 102–105, 121, 124–126, 129–130, 138–139, 219–221, 227–229, 235, 277–279, 282–285, 351–374, 398, 420, 422–425 dative of interest  21 ergative  83, 165, 274–275, 287 genitive  104, 247, 283–285, 287, 411 instrumental  41, 174, 279, 287, 317–319, 323, 329, 364 locative  129, 132, 138, 191, 317–319, 335, 364, 370 nominative  257–258, 352, 430 Case marking  4–5, 62, 185–186, 189, 247, 274, 277, 320, 347 Causation  22–23, 25, 221, 224, 238, 361, 423, 425 direct  22–23, 25, 224, 238 indirect  22–23, 25, 361 Causee  18, 22, 24–25, 178, 205, 217 Clitic doubling  353, 367 Complex event  42, 46–47 Complex predicate  34–35, 37, 40, 48 Compound  40, 42, 53–56, 63, 335, 377 Consciousness of the beneficiary  15–17, 250, 255, 257, 263–266, 389–390, 392 Converb  40, 42, 44–45, 48, 53–54, 62, 327, 329, 431–432 Coordination  38, 46, 186, 197–198 Core argument  151, 173, 204, 227, 278, 290, 324, 327 Cross-reference  274 D Deputative-benefactive  14, 31, 72, 192, 217, 247­–248, 250–253, 258–259, 264–265, 282, 285, 307, 322–323, 380–381, 383–385, 391–392, 396–403, 408–409, 412–413, 415 Disambiguation  21, 62, 287, 327, 329–330, 383, 389 Ditransitive  1, 25, 74–75, 78, 92, 133, 148, 150, 178, 185–186, 190, 194, 196, 198–199, 205, 210, 220–221, 223, 227–229, 235, 257, 280, 282, 299–300, 324, 334, 381–382, 414 clauses  1, 25, 74–75, 92, 133, 195–196, 198–199, 220–221, 227–229, 235, 257, 353, 381 derived  42–43, 53, 56, 148, 150, 185–186, 199, 277, 295, 300, 305, 307, 346, 357 underived  4, 205, 210, 280, 282, 337, 381 Double-object construction  26, 47, 220–228, 230–237, 239–240, 338, 381–382 E Engager-benefactive  11, 15, 248, 252, 378, 409, 411–415 Event benefactive  75–76, 85–92 Experiencer  21–22, 35–36, 90, 166, 283–284, 321, 341, 363–364, 382–384, 387–389, 391 G Give  6, 9, 11, 17–18, 31–60, 63, 72, 77–81, 85–89, 99–101, 106–116, 133, 152, 157–161, 188–192, 195–196, 198–199, 205, 215–216, 219–220, 223–224, 234, 280–282, 286, 378–379, 381–391, 394, 398–405, 411–415 Goal  23–24, 35, 126–127, 131–136, 138–139, 141–142, 165, 176, 191, 250, 386, 405–412, 414–416 H Head marking  186 I Intransitive clause  13, 155, 165, 169–171, 178–179, 187, 205, 210–215, 257–258, 276–278, 300–301, 334–337, 367, 402–403, 405–406, 408, 412 extended  187 Inverse clause  205–206 L Language change  46 M Malefactive (also maleficiary)  5, 11–13, 20, 32–33, 98–116, 147–151, 154–158, 170–171, 178–179, 216–217, 258, 281–283, 289–290, 295–302, 304–306, 308–313, 318, 322–323, 325, 360­–362, 385, 419–421 Metaphor  116, 126, 131–132, 136, 223, 226, 337–338, 362–363 Metonymy  135–137, 141–142, 406–408 Motion verbs  128, 131, 140–141, 167–168, 187, 206, 310 O Object  25, 44, 79, 86, 129, 133, 147–150, 152, 156–176, 178–179, 199, 209–210, 220–240, 274, 279–280, 283–284, 299–300, 317–320, 324–330, 333–339, 341–342, 344, 346–347, 363, 366–368, 378–382, 384, 386, 390, 405, 426, 429–430 animate  23, 257, 280, 283, 325, 327, 333, 338–339, 347, 373 applied  149–150, 152, 156–176, 178–179, 195, 283–285, 287 definite  205, 325–329 direct  86, 150, 152, 165, 220, 222, 230, 325, 333–334, 342, 346, 366–368, 387, 405 inanimate  207, 280, 333–334, 336, 380 indirect  44, 133, 209–210, 221–222, 226, 228, 237–239, 379, 382, 384, 387, 405 primary  79, 199, 206, 317–319, 324–330 Oblique  4, 148, 150, 166, 175, 198, 278–279, 284–285, 290, 383, 387 P Passive  31–32, 74–75, 89–90, 100–101, 112–114, 172–174, 179, 210, 212, 233, 280, 298, 302, 419–433 Patient  2, 4–5, 22, 25, 30, 32, 59, 62, 75, 195–196, 209, 213, 221–222, 233, 299, 332–334, 430–431 Periphrastic constructions  29–37, 39–40, 42, 44, 47–48, 53, 56, 58–60, 62–63, 77, 99, 174–175, 369 Plain beneficiary (also plain benefactive)  14, 31, 34, 247–250, 257–258, 264–268, 281–282, 285, 322–323, 391–392, 396–400, 403, 408, 413, 415 Polysemy  5–7, 18–25, 126, 130–132, 137, 246, 267–268, 282–283, 290, 306, 368 Possession  14, 19–20, 49, 157–165, 175, 186, 192, 197, 209, 219–221, 223–224, 253–255, 283–284, 363, 365–368, 395, 397, 405–411, 428–430 alienable  186, 192, 429 external  19–20, 129, 157–158, 283, 365–368 inalienable  186, 407, 411 Index  predicative  365 Possessive control  49, 393, 395, 398, 405–410 Purpose  36–37, 121–132, 134–142, 149, 252, 254–255, 260–261, 263, 286, 290, 370, 379, 389 Purposive  121–124, 126–142, 379–380, 382–383, 386 R Reason  6–7, 16, 22–23, 36, 251, 254, 269, 389, 428–429 Reception  2, 6, 19, 133–134, 188–190, 194, 219–226, 238–240, 252, 254–255, 268, 357, 397 Recipient  4, 6, 13–16, 18–19, 35–36, 48, 50, 52, 74–75, 115, 132–135, 152, 188–192, 194–199, 219–223, 226–228, 230–233, 248, 254–255, 265, 267, 280–283, 304–305, 324, 326–327, 346–347, 355–365, 370–371, 378–379, 382–384, 389–390, 395–397 Recipient-beneficiary (see also benefactive-recipient)  13–16, 132–133, 188–192, 194, 199, 222, 225, 232–235, 238–240, 248–250, 252–255, 257–258, 267, 285, 288, 305, 307, 358–361, 370–371, 396–400, 402–403, 405–406, 408–409 Reconstruction  42, 151, 165–166, 203, 285, 312 Reflexive  57, 78, 85, 259, 302, 309–310, 331, 339–341, 344, 347–348, 390 Resultative  336, 339, 342, 416 S Self-benefactive  4, 57, 76, 78–89, 91, 106–108 Serial verb construction  7–10, 37–38, 40–42, 50, 63, 109–110, 116, 175, 197, 380–387 Shared-benefit construction  71, 83–84, 91 Source  35, 47, 50, 152, 156–159, 162–164, 171, 174, 176, 178–179, 258, 268, 303, 305–306, 361 Specific benefactive marker  7, 10–11, 31, 72, 114, 159, 259, 266, 268, 321, 355–356, Subject  31–32, 57, 75, 80, 83–86, 91, 135, 150, 170–171, 209, 222, 240, 261, 273–275, 288–289, 317–320, 327, 332–333, 340–343, 352, 358, 360–361, 379–383, 385, 405, 419–433 Subordination  126, 140, 286, 370, 379–380, 382–383, 431, 434 T Take  26, 29, 33, 35, 41, 57–59, 63, 79, 81–82, 106–108, 156–157, 179, 198, 216, 258, 282, 284–285, 289, 302, 305, 307, 337, 361, 364, 366, 371, 382, 396 Theme  3, 11, 14–15, 149–150, 157–159, 171, 175–176, 190, 194, 198–199, 207, 219–220, 280–281, 382, 384, 386, 389–390, 395, 405–412, 414–416 Three-argument constructions  195, 198–199, 234 Transfer of possession  49, 175, 219–221, 224, 233, 254–255, 261, 365, 386 Transitive verb  25, 32, 49, 148, 150, 172–173, 176, 187, 190–193, 199, 207, 210–215, 275–279, 299–303, 333, 336, 339, 368–369, 420, 426 Transitivity  13, 25, 187, 206, 211, 228, 245, 250, 257, 259, 300, 391, 404, 423–424, 432 Transitivity increase  150, 206, 213, 300, 423–424  Index U Undergoer  3, 52, 98, 205, 207, 368 Underspecified benefactive marker  12–13, 33, 265–266 Unintentional action  22, 116, 213, 263, 361–362, 425 V Valency  29–36, 38–39, 48–49, 51–53, 55, 59–61, 150, 199, 204, 257, 275–279, 288–289, 299–301, 303, 334, 346–347 Valency change  31 Valency increase  178, 188, 299, 308, 326, 419–420, 433 Verb extension  296–299, 301–305, 308–309, 311–312, 314 Verb morphology  29, 42, 98, 158, 204, 272, 297, 301, 304, 309–310, 313, 318–319, 341–343, 347 Verbal origin  41–42, 50, 52, 56, 174, 216, 304, 387, 420 Verbal semantics  9, 21, 34, 59–60, 106, 147, 179, 191, 209, 221, 225, 247, 257–259, 266, 268, 324, 332, 380–388, Voice  82, 85, 171–172, 179, 187, 275–276, 289, 331, 341–342, 345, 348, 431 Volitionality  15–16, 23, 60, 251, 255–256, 260–261, 263–266, 269, 424 W Word order  33, 45, 48, 51–52, 74, 185–186, 189, 195–196, 204, 275, 333–334, 351, 377, 381, 387 Typological Studies in Language A complete list of titles in this series can be found on the publishers’ website, www.benjamins.com 92 Zúñiga, Fernando and Seppo Kittilä (eds.): Benefactives and Malefactives Typological perspectives and case studies 2010 x, 440 pp 91 Fiedler, Ines and Anne Schwarz (eds.): The Expression of Information Structure A documentation of its diversity across Africa 2010 xii, 383 pp 90 Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale (eds.): Gradience, Gradualness and Grammaticalization 2010 ix, 306 pp 89 Gildea, Spike and Francesc Queixalós (eds.): Ergativity in Amazonia v, 317 pp. + index Expected April 2010 88 Schmidtke-Bode, Karsten: A Typology of Purpose Clauses 2009 xii, 229 pp 87 Cyffer, Norbert, Erwin Ebermann and Georg Ziegelmeyer (eds.): Negation Patterns in West African Languages and Beyond 2009 vi, 368 pp 86 Mahieu, Marc-Antoine and Nicole Tersis (eds.): Variations on Polysynthesis The Eskaleut languages 2009 ix, 312 pp 85 Givón, T and Masayoshi Shibatani (eds.): Syntactic Complexity Diachrony, acquisition, neurocognition, evolution 2009 vi, 553 pp 84 Newman, John (ed.): The Linguistics of Eating and Drinking 2009 xii, 280 pp 83 Corrigan, Roberta, Edith A Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali and Kathleen M Wheatley (eds.): Formulaic Language Volume Acquisition, loss, psychological reality, and functional explanations 2009 xxiv, 361 pp 82 Corrigan, Roberta, Edith A Moravcsik, Hamid Ouali and Kathleen M Wheatley (eds.): Formulaic Language Volume Distribution and historical change 2009 xxiv, 315 pp 81 Corbett, Greville G and Michael Noonan (eds.): Case and Grammatical Relations Studies in honor of Bernard Comrie 2008 ix, 290 pp 80 Laury, Ritva (ed.): Crosslinguistic Studies of Clause Combining The multifunctionality of conjunctions 2008 xiv, 253 pp 79 Abraham, Werner and Elisabeth Leiss (eds.): Modality–Aspect Interfaces Implications and typological solutions 2008 xxiv, 422 pp 78 Harrison, K David, David S Rood and Arienne Dwyer (eds.): Lessons from Documented Endangered Languages 2008 vi, 375 pp 77 Seoane, Elena and María José López-Couso (eds.): Theoretical and Empirical Issues in Grammaticalization In collaboration with Teresa Fanego 2008 x, 367 pp 76 López-Couso, María José and Elena Seoane (eds.): Rethinking Grammaticalization New perspectives In collaboration with Teresa Fanego 2008 x, 355 pp 75 Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Erin Shay (eds.): Interaction of Morphology and Syntax Case studies in Afroasiatic 2008 v, 234 pp 74 Kurzon, Dennis and Silvia Adler (eds.): Adpositions Pragmatic, semantic and syntactic perspectives 2008 viii, 307 pp 73 Ansaldo, Umberto, Stephen Matthews and Lisa Lim (eds.): Deconstructing Creole 2007 xii, 292 pp 72 Næss, Åshild: Prototypical Transitivity 2007 x, 240 pp 71 Nedjalkov, Vladimir P (ed.): Reciprocal Constructions With the assistance of Emma Š Geniušienė and Zlatka Guentchéva 2007 xxiii, 2219 pp. (5 vols.) 70 Zúñiga, Fernando: Deixis and Alignment Inverse systems in indigenous languages of the Americas 2006 xii, 309 pp 69 Aranovich, Raúl (ed.): Split Auxiliary Systems A cross-linguistic perspective 2007 vii, 277 pp 68 Abraham, Werner and Larisa Leisiö (eds.): Passivization and Typology Form and function 2006 x, 553 pp 67 Veselinova, Ljuba N.: Suppletion in Verb Paradigms Bits and pieces of the puzzle 2006 xviii, 236 pp 66 Hickmann, Maya and Stéphane Robert (eds.): Space in Languages Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories 2006 x, 362 pp 65 Tsunoda, Tasaku and Taro Kageyama (eds.): Voice and Grammatical Relations In Honor of Masayoshi Shibatani 2006 xviii, 342 pp 64 Voeltz, F K Erhard (ed.): Studies in African Linguistic Typology 2006 xiv, 426 pp 63 Filimonova, Elena (ed.): Clusivity Typology and case studies of the inclusive–exclusive distinction 2005 xii, 436 pp 62 Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth and Cecilia E Ford (eds.): Sound Patterns in Interaction Crosslinguistic studies from conversation 2004 viii, 406 pp 61 Bhaskararao, Peri and Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (eds.): Non-nominative Subjects Volume 2004 xii, 319 pp 60 Bhaskararao, Peri and Karumuri Venkata Subbarao (eds.): Non-nominative Subjects Volume 2004 xii, 325 pp 59 Fischer, Olga, Muriel Norde and Harry Perridon (eds.): Up and down the Cline – The Nature of Grammaticalization 2004 viii, 406 pp 58 Haspelmath, Martin (ed.): Coordinating Constructions 2004 xcv, 578 pp 57 Mattissen, Johanna: Dependent-Head Synthesis in Nivkh A contribution to a typology of polysynthesis 2003 x, 350 pp 56 Shay, Erin and Uwe Seibert (eds.): Motion, Direction and Location in Languages In honor of Zygmunt Frajzyngier 2003 xvi, 305 pp 55 Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Erin Shay: Explaining Language Structure through Systems Interaction 2003 xviii, 309 pp 54 Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y and R.M.W Dixon (eds.): Studies in Evidentiality 2003 xiv, 349 pp 53 Givón, T and Bertram F Malle (eds.): The Evolution of Language out of Pre-language 2002 x, 394 pp 52 Güldemann, Tom and Manfred von Roncador (eds.): Reported Discourse A meeting ground for different linguistic domains 2002 xii, 425 pp 51 Newman, John (ed.): The Linguistics of Sitting, Standing and Lying 2002 xii, 409 pp 50 Feigenbaum, Susanne and Dennis Kurzon (eds.): Prepositions in their Syntactic, Semantic and Pragmatic Context 2002 vi, 304 pp 49 Wischer, Ilse and Gabriele Diewald (eds.): New Reflections on Grammaticalization 2002 xiv, 437 pp 48 Shibatani, Masayoshi (ed.): The Grammar of Causation and Interpersonal Manipulation 2002 xviii, 551 pp 47 Baron, Irène, Michael Herslund and Finn Sørensen (eds.): Dimensions of Possession 2001 vi, 337 pp 46 Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y., R.M.W Dixon and Masayuki Onishi (eds.): Non-canonical Marking of Subjects and Objects 2001 xii, 364 pp 45 Bybee, Joan and Paul J Hopper (eds.): Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure 2001 vii, 492 pp 44 Voeltz, F K Erhard and Christa Kilian-Hatz (eds.): Ideophones 2001 x, 436 pp 43 Gildea, Spike (ed.): Reconstructing Grammar Comparative Linguistics and Grammaticalization 2000 xiv, 269 pp 42 Diessel, Holger: Demonstratives Form, function and grammaticalization 1999 xii, 205 pp 41 Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Traci S Walker-Curl (eds.): Reciprocals Forms and functions Volume 2000 xii, 201 pp 40 Frajzyngier, Zygmunt and Traci S Walker-Curl (eds.): Reflexives Forms and functions Volume 2000 xiv, 286 pp 39 Payne, Doris L and Immanuel Barshi (eds.): External Possession 1999 ix, 573 pp 38 Siewierska, Anna and Jae Jung Song (eds.): Case, Typology and Grammar In honor of Barry J Blake 1998 395 pp 37 Giacalone-Ramat, Anna and Paul J Hopper (eds.): The Limits of Grammaticalization 1998 vi, 307 pp 36 Newman, John (ed.): The Linguistics of Giving 1998 xv, 373 pp 35 Givón, T (ed.): Grammatical Relations A functionalist perspective 1997 viii, 350 pp 34 Givón, T (ed.): Conversation Cognitive, communicative and social perspectives 1997 viii, 302 pp 33 Fox, Barbara A (ed.): Studies in Anaphora 1996 xii, 518 pp 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 Bybee, Joan and Suzanne Fleischman (eds.): Modality in Grammar and Discourse 1995 viii, 575 pp Gernsbacher, Morton Ann and T Givón (eds.): Coherence in Spontaneous Text 1995 x, 267 pp Downing, Pamela A and Michael Noonan (eds.): Word Order in Discourse 1995 x, 595 pp Kahrel (PJK), Peter and René van den Berg (eds.): Typological Studies in Negation 1994 x, 385 pp Givón, T (ed.): Voice and Inversion 1994 viii, 402 pp Fox, Barbara A and Paul J Hopper (eds.): Voice: Form and Function 1994 xiii, 377 pp Lord, Carol: Historical Change in Serial Verb Constructions 1993 x, 273 pp Svorou, Soteria: The Grammar of Space 1994 xiv, 290 pp Perkins, Revere D.: Deixis, Grammar, and Culture 1992 x, 245 pp Kemmer, Suzanne: The Middle Voice 1993 xii, 300 pp Payne, Doris L (ed.): Pragmatics of Word Order Flexibility 1992 viii, 320 pp Downing, Pamela A., Susan D Lima and Michael Noonan (eds.): The Linguistics of Literacy 1992 xx, 334 pp 20 Croft, William, Suzanne Kemmer and Keith Denning (eds.): Studies in Typology and Diachrony Papers presented to Joseph H Greenberg on his 75th birthday 1990 xxxiv, 243 pp 19:2 Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Bernd Heine (eds.): Approaches to Grammaticalization Volume II Types of grammatical markers 1991 xii, 558 pp 19:1 Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Bernd Heine (eds.): Approaches to Grammaticalization Volume I Theoretical and methodological issues 1991 xii, 360 pp 18 Haiman, John and Sandra A Thompson (eds.): Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse 1988 xiii, 428 pp 17 Hammond, Michael, Edith A Moravcsik and Jessica Wirth (eds.): Studies in Syntactic Typology 1988 xiv, 380 pp 16 Shibatani, Masayoshi (ed.): Passive and Voice 1988 xi, 706 pp 15 Austin, Peter (ed.): Complex Sentence Constructions in Australian Languages 1988 vii, 289 pp 14 Hinds, John, Shoichi Iwasaki and Senko K Maynard (eds.): Perspectives on Topicalization The case of Japanese WA 1987 xi, 307 pp 13 Never published 12 Nedjalkov, Vladimir P (ed.): Typology of Resultative Constructions Translated from the original Russian edition (1983) Translation edited by Bernard Comrie 1988 xx, 573 pp 11 Tomlin, Russell S.: Coherence and Grounding in Discourse Outcome of a Symposium, Eugene, Oregon, June 1984 1987 viii, 512 pp 10 Ransom, Evelyn N.: Complementation: its Meaning and Forms 1986 xii, 226 pp Bybee, Joan: Morphology A Study of the Relation between Meaning and Form 1985 xii, 235 pp Slobin, Dan I and Karl Zimmer (eds.): Studies in Turkish Linguistics 1986 vi, 294 pp Craig, Colette G (ed.): Noun Classes and Categorization Proceedings of a symposium on categorization and noun classification, Eugene, Oregon, October 1983 1986 vii, 481 pp Haiman, John (ed.): Iconicity in Syntax Proceedings of a symposium on iconicity in syntax, Stanford, June 24–26, 1983 1985 vi, 402 pp Rutherford, William E (ed.): Language Universals and Second Language Acquisition 1984 ix, 264 pp Chisholm, William, Louis T Milic and John A.C Greppin (eds.): Interrogativity A colloquium on the grammar, typology and pragmatics of questions in seven diverse languages, Cleveland, Ohio, October 5th 1981-May 3rd 1982 1984 v, 302 pp Givón, T.: Topic Continuity in Discourse A quantitative cross-language study 1983 vi, 492 pp Haiman, John and Pamela Munro (eds.): Switch Reference and Universal Grammar Proceedings of a symposium on switch reference and universal grammar, Winnipeg, May 1981 1983 xv, 337 pp Hopper, Paul J (ed.): Tense-Aspect Between semantics & pragmatics 1982 x, 350 pp .. .Typological Studies in Language (TSL) A companion series to the journal Studies in Language Volumes in this series are functionally and typologically oriented, covering specific topics in. .. providing financial support to the workshop After learning from the late Mickey Noonan that he was interested in such an article collection for the Benjamins series Typological Studies in Language,... fruitful comparison of different instances of benefaction possible, both in individual languages and cross-linguistically Instead of claiming that defining the beneficiary in the terms proposed below