Home On the right of being a comparative concept
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

On the right of being a comparative concept

  • Yury Lander EMAIL logo and Peter Arkadiev
Published/Copyright: September 27, 2016

Abstract

We provide a critical review of the distinction between “comparative concepts” and “descriptive categories”, showing that in current typological practice the former are usually dependent on the latter and are often vague, being organized around prototypes rather than having sharp boundaries. We also propose a classification of comparative concepts, arguing that their definitions can be based on similarities between languages or on differences between languages or can also be “blind” to language-particular facts. We conclude that, first, comparative concepts and descriptive categories are ontologically not as distinct as some typologists would like to have it, and, second, that attempts at a “non-aprioristic” approach to linguistic description and language typology are more of an illusion than reality or even a desideratum.

Acknowledgements

We thank Michael Betsch, Anna Dybo, Maxim Fedotov, Dmitry Gerasimov, Martin Haspelmath, Maria Kholodilova, Tetiana Liubchenko, Tanja Mortelmans, Sorin Paliga, Benjamin Saade, Hedwig Skirgård, Nathan W. Hill, and Fernando Zúñiga for useful comments on an earlier version of this paper, and Frans Plank for encouragement to write it. None of these colleagues is responsible for the views expressed here. This material is partly based upon work supported by the Russian Science Foundation, grant No. 14-18-03270.

Abbreviations

3

3rd person

abs

absolutive

ben

benefactive

caus

causative

dir

directive

dyn

dynamicity

erg

ergative

io

indirect object

loc

locative applicative

obl

oblique

pl

plural

poss

possessive

pst

past

rel

relative

sg

singular.

References

Andrews, Avery D. 2007. Relative clauses. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description (2nd edn.), Vol. 2: Complex constructions, 206–236. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511619434.004Search in Google Scholar

Ariel, Mira. 1990. Accessing noun-phrase antecedents. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Brody, Jill. 1984. Some problems with the concept of basic word order. Linguistics 22. 711–736.10.1515/ling.1984.22.5.711Search in Google Scholar

Bybee, Joan L. & Östen Dahl. 1989. The creation of tense and aspect systems in the languages of the world. Studies in Language 13. 51–103.10.1075/sl.13.1.03bybSearch in Google Scholar

Cinque, Guglielmo. 2013. Typological studies: Word order and relative clauses. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Davies, William D. & Stanley Dubinsky. 2004. The grammar of raising and control: A course in syntactic argumentation. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470755693Search in Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. 1994. Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511611896Search in Google Scholar

Dixon, R. M. W. & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald. 2003. Word: A typological framework. In R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), Word: A cross-linguistic typology, 1–41. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486241Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2006. Functionalism and the theory–metalanguage confusion. In Grace Wiebe et al. (eds.), Phonology, morphology, and the empirical imperative: Papers in honour of Bruce Derwing, 27–59. Taipei: Crane.Search in Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew S. 2013. Order of adjective and noun. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The world atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max-Planck-Institut für evolutionäre Anthropologie.http://wals.info/chapter/87 (accessed on 21 March 2016)Search in Google Scholar

Evans, Nicholas D. 2010. Semantic typology. In Song (ed.) 2010, 504–533.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0024Search in Google Scholar

Ewert, Alfred. 1940. Dante’s theory of language. The Modern Language Review 35. 355–366.10.2307/3716632Search in Google Scholar

Falk, Yehuda N. 2006. Subjects and Universal Grammar: An explanatory theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486265Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2003. The geometry of grammatical meaning: semantic maps and cross-linguistic comparison. In Michael Tomasello (ed.), The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, Vol. 2, 211–243. New York: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2009. Framework-free grammatical theory. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 375–402. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0014Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86. 663–687.10.1353/lan.2010.0021Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2011. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45. 31–80.10.1515/flin.2011.002Search in Google Scholar

Haspelmath, Martin. 2014. Comparative syntax. In Andrew Carnie, Yosuke Sato & Daniel Siddiqi (eds.), The Routledge handbook of syntax, 490–508. Abingdon: Routledge.10.4324/9781315796604-36Search in Google Scholar

Hawkins, John. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Jaggar, Philip J. 1998. Restrictive vs non-restrictive relative clauses in Hausa: Where morphosyntax and semantics meet. Studies in African Linguistics 27. 199–238.10.32473/sal.v27i2.107383Search in Google Scholar

Jaggar, Philip J. 2001. Hausa. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/loall.7Search in Google Scholar

Keenan, Edward L. 1976. Towards a universal definition of ‘Subject’. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 303–333. New York: Academic Press.Search in Google Scholar

Lander, Yury & Natalia Tyshkevich. 2015. True, liminal and fake prototypes in syntactic typology. In Ekaterina Lyutikova et al. (eds.), Tipologija morfosintaksičeskix parametrov, Vol. 2, 185–199. Moskva: Moskovskij pedagogičeskij gosudarstvennyj universitet.Search in Google Scholar

LaPolla, Randy J. & Dory Poa. 2006. On describing word order. In Felix Ameka et al. (eds.), Catching language: The standing challenge of grammar writing, 269–295. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Lehmann, Christian. 1984. Der Relativsatz: Typologie seiner Strukturen, Theorie seiner Funktionen, Kompendium seiner Grammatik. Tübingen: Narr.Search in Google Scholar

Malchukov, Andrej L. 2000. Dependency reversal in Noun-Attribute constructions: Towards a typology. München: Lincom Europa.Search in Google Scholar

Mithun, Marianne. 1987. Is basic word order universal? In Russell S. Tomlin (ed.), Coherence and grounding in discourse, 281–328. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.11.14mitSearch in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1988. On alienable and inalienable possession. In William Shipley (ed.), In honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American linguistics, 557–609. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110852387.557Search in Google Scholar

Nichols, Johanna. 1992. Linguistic diversity in space and time. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226580593.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Raible, Wolfgang. 2001. Language universals and language typology. In Martin Haspelmath et al. (eds.), Language typology and language universals: An international handbook, Vol. 1, 1–24. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110171549.2Search in Google Scholar

Ross, Malcolm. 1998. Possessive-like attribute constructions in the Oceanic languages of Northwest Melanesia. Oceanic Linguistics 37. 234–276.10.2307/3623410Search in Google Scholar

Serdobolskaya, Natalia. 2009. Towards the typology of raising: A functional approach. In Alexander Arkhipov & Patience Epps (eds.), New challenges for typology: Transcending the borders and redefining the distinctions, 245–270. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Siewierska, Anna. 1994. Word order and linearization. In R. E. Asher et al. (eds.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics, Vol. 9, 4993–4999. Oxford: Pergamon.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Jae Jung (ed.). 2010. The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Stassen, Leon. 2010. The problem of cross-linguistic identification. In Song (ed.) 2010, 90–99. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0006Search in Google Scholar

Tolstoj, Nikita Il’jič. 1968. Nekotorye problemy sravnitel’noj slavjanskoj semasiologii [Some problems of comparative Slavic semasiology]. In Slavjanskoe jazykoznanie: VI Meždunarodnyj s”jezd slavistov (Praga, avgust 1968 g.): Doklady sovetskoj delegacii, 339–365. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR.Search in Google Scholar

van der Auwera, Johan & Volker Gast. 2010. Categories and prototypes. In Song (ed.) 2010, 166–189.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0010Search in Google Scholar

van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2. 79–124.10.1515/lity.1998.2.1.79Search in Google Scholar

van der Auwera, Johan & Kalyanamalini Sahoo. 2015. On comparative concepts and descriptive categories, such as they are. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 47. 136–173.10.1080/03740463.2015.1115636Search in Google Scholar

Wierzbicka, Anna. 2002. Semantic primes and linguistic typology. In Cliff Goddard & Anna Wierzbicka (eds.), Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and empirical findings, Vol. 2, 257–300. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.61.10wieSearch in Google Scholar

Xolodilova, Marija A. 2015. Soglasovanie s veršinoj otnositel’nyx konstrukcij i obosoblennyx imennyx oborotov v russkom jazyke [Agreement with the head of relative clauses and detached noun phrases in Russian]. Russkij jazyk v naučnom osveščenii 2(30). 74–97.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-3-22
Revised: 2016-7-2
Published Online: 2016-9-27
Published in Print: 2016-10-1

©2016 by De Gruyter Mouton

Downloaded on 8.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingty-2016-0014/pdf
Scroll to top button