Volume 22, Issue 3 -

This paper presents a cross-linguistic investigation of the antipassive within the framework of Radical Construction Grammar. Based on function, this study identifies constructions in 70 languages from 25 language families and four geographical macro areas. Iconically motivated correlations were found between functions and the morphosyntactic strategies they employ. The results of this study suggest that constructions indicating the lower individuation of patients and constructions indicating the lower affectedness of patients, previously grouped together as ‘antipassive’, should be considered two separate construction types. This is based on their separate functions, the distinct morphosyntactic strategies used to encode them across languages, and differences in productivity with regard to semantic classes of verbs.

Studies on the grammaticalization of body-part nouns into reflexives have often formulated cross-linguistic generalizations, but have mostly failed to provide detailed analyses of similar developments attested in unrelated languages. As a consequence, valuable insights have sometimes been overlooked. The purpose of this paper is twofold: on the one hand, it identifies a higher number of languages using “head”-reflexives than previous accounts. On the other hand, its purpose is to analyze the diachronic evolution of nouns denoting “head” into reflexive markers in three unrelated language groups (Basque, Berber and Kartvelian) and to show how “head”-reflexives synchronically and diachronically interact with secondary reflexivization strategies, such as detransitivization. The results suggest that the areal factor has a considerable impact on the emergence of “head”-reflexives; they also show that none of the languages analyzed reflects all grammaticalization stages put forward in the literature. Accordingly, it is argued that the grammaticalization stages are optional, and that the correlation between formal and semantic change is not obligatory.

Using a sample of 116 languages, this article investigates the typology of comparative constructions and their distribution in Melanesia, one of the world’s least-understood linguistic areas. We present a rigorous definition of a comparative construction as a “comparative concept”, thereby excluding many constructions which have been considered functionally comparatives in Melanesia. Conjoined comparatives are shown to dominate at the core of the area on the island of New Guinea, while (monoclausal) exceed comparatives are found in the maritime regions around New Guinea. Outside of Melanesia adpositional and other comparative constructions including particle comparatives are most frequent in Austronesian languages. The unity of the conjoined comparative type in the core Melanesian area illustrates that, while morpho-syntactic profiles of Melanesian languages are heterogenous, significant convergence in the “ways of saying things” can be found across the region. Additionally, we find no cases of clause chaining constructions being used for encoding comparatives, even in canonical clause chaining languages of central New Guinea. Our findings thus offer no support for Stassen’s claim of a correlation between temporal chaining type and comparative construction type. Instead we suggest that an areal preference for mini-clauses may explain the dominance of the conjoined comparative in Melanesia.