Universals of causative and anticausative verb formation and the spontaneity scale

Open access

Abstract

In this paper, I formulate and explain a number of universal generalizations about the formation of causative verbs (overtly marked verbs with causal meaning) and anticausative verbs (overtly marked verbs with noncausal meaning). Given the “spontaneity scale” of basic verb meanings (transitive > unergative > automatic unaccusative > costly unaccusative > agentful), we can say that verb pairs with a noncausal verb higher on the scale tend to be causative pairs, and verb pairs with a noncausal verb lower on the scale tend to be anticausative pairs. I propose that these generalizations can be subsumed under form-frequency correspondence: That transitive base verbs tend to form causatives (often analytic causatives) is because they rarely occur in causal contexts, and the fact that unaccusative verbs tend to be coded as anticausatives is because they frequently occur in causal contexts, and special marking is required for the rarer and less expected situation.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Amberber Mengistu. 2000. Valency-changing and valency-encoding devices in Amharic. In Dixon R. M. W. & Aikhenvald Alexandra Y. (eds.) Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity 312-332. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Asher R. E. & Kumari T. C. 1997. Malayalam. London: Routledge.

  • Austin Peter K. 1997. Causatives and applicatives in Australian Aboriginal languages. In Matsumura Kazuto & Hayashi Tooru (eds.) The dative and related phenomena 165-225. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.

  • Bybee Joan L. & Perkins Revere & Pagliuca William. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

  • Cobbinah Alexander & Lüpke Friederike. 2009. Not cut to fit: Zero coded passives in African languages.In Brenzinger Matthias & Fehn Anne-Maria (eds.) Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of African Linguistics 153-165. Cologne: Köppe.

  • Cole Peter & Son Min-Jeong. 2004. The argument structure of verbs with the suffix -kan in Indonesian. Oceanic Linguistics 43(2). 339-364.

  • Comrie Bernard. 1975. Causatives and universal grammar. Transactions of the Philological Society 1974. 1-32.

  • Comrie Bernard. 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Comrie Bernard. 2006. Transitivity pairs markedness and diachronic stability. Linguistics 44(2). 303-318.

  • Creissels Denis. 2015. Valency properties of Mandinka verbs. In Malchukov Andrej L. & Comrie Bernard (eds.) Valency classes in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook vol. 1 221-259. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

  • Croft William. 1990. Possible verbs and the structure of events. In Tsohatzidis Savas L. (ed.) Meanings and prototypes: Studies in linguistic categorization 48-73. London: Routledge.

  • Croft William. 2003. Typology and universals. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Davis Henry. 2000. Salish evidence on the causative-inchoative alternation. In Dressler Wolfgang U. (ed.) Morphological analysis in comparison 25-60. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Dixon Robert M. W. 1988. A grammar of Boumaa Fijian. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Dixon Robert M. W. 2000. A typology of causatives: Form syntax and meaning. In Dixon Robert M.W. & A ikhenvald Alexandra Y. (eds.) Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity 30-83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Givón T. 1990. Syntax: A functional-typological introduction. Vol. 2. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Haiman John. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59(4). 781-819.

  • Hale Kenneth L. 2000. A Uto-Aztecan (’O’odham) reflection of a general limit on predicate argument structure. In Casad Eugene H. & Willett Thomas L. (eds.) Uto-Aztecan: Structural temporal and geographic perspectives: Papers in memory of Wick R. Miller by the friends of Uto-Aztecan 155-169. Hermosillo: Universidad de Sonora.

  • Hale Kenneth L. & Keyser Samuel J. 1987. A view from the middle. Cambridge MA: MITWPL.

  • Hale Kenneth L. & Keyser Samuel J. 1993. On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. In Hale Kenneth L. & Keyser Samuel J. (eds.) The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

  • Haspelmath Martin & Karjus Andres. 2017. Explaining asymmetries in number marking: Singulatives pluratives and usage frequency. Linguistics to appear.

  • Haspelmath Martin & the AP iCS Consortium. 2013. Passive constructions. In Michaelis Susanne Maria & Maurer Philippe & Haspelmath Martin & Huber Magnus (eds.) Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. http://apics-online.info/parameters/90. (Accessed 2017-02-15.)

  • Haspelmath Martin & Calude Andreea & Spagnol Michael & Narrog Heiko & Bamyacı Elif. 2014. Coding causal-noncausal verb alternations: A form-frequency correspondence explanation. Journal of Linguistics 50(3). 587-625.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 1987. Transitivity alternations of the anticausative type. (Arbeitspapiere des Instituts für Sprachwissenschaft N.F. Nr. 4). Cologne: Universität zu Köln.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 1993. More on the typology of inchoative/causative verb alternations. In Comrie Bernard & Polinsky Maria (eds.) Causatives and transitivity 87-120. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2008. Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics 19(1). 1-33.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2011a. The gradual coalescence into “words” in grammaticalization. In Narrog Heiko & H eine Bernd (eds.) The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization 342-355. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2011b. The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45(1). 31-80.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2015a. Transitivity prominence. In Malchukov Andrej L. & Comrie Bernard (eds.) Valency classes in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook vol. 1 131-147. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2015b. Descriptive scales versus comparative scales. In Bornkessel-Schlesewsky Ina & Malchukov Andrej L. & Richards Marc (eds.) Scales and hierarchies: A cross-disciplinary perspective 45-58. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2017. Explaining alienability contrasts in adpossessive constructions: Predictability vs. iconicity. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 36(2). 193-231.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2018a. Explaining grammatical coding asymmetries to appear.

  • Haspelmath Martin. 2018b. Revisiting the anasynthetic spiral. In Heine Bernd & Narrog Heiko (eds.) Grammaticalization and language typology to appear.

  • Howard Harry. 2001. Negentropic causation vs. entropic inchoation. In Silva A.S. (ed.) Linguagem e cognição: A perspectiva da linguística cognitiva 401-421. Braga: AP L/UCP Faculdade de Filosofia de Braga. (http://semanticsarchive.net/Archive/GiwZjgwO)

  • Kazenin Konstantin I. 1994. On the lexical distribution of agent-preserving and object-preserving transitivity alternations. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 17(02). 141-154.

  • Kulikov Leonid I. 1993. The “second causative”: A typological sketch. In Comrie Bernard & Polinsky Maria (eds.) Causatives and transitivity 121-154. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Kulikov Leonid I. 1998a. Causative constructons in Tuvinian: Towards a typology of transitivity. In Johanson Lars (ed.) The Mainz Meeting: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkic Linguistics 258-264. (Turcologica 32). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.

  • Kulikov Leonid I. 1998b. Passive anticausative and classification of verbs: The case of Vedic. In Kulikov Leonid I. & Vater Heinz (eds.) Typology of verbal categories: Papers presented to Vladimir Nedjalkov on the occasion of his 70th birthday 139-154. Tübingen: Niemeyer.

  • Kulikov Leonid. 2013. Constraints on the causative derivation in early Vedic: Evidence for a diachronic typology of transitivity. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 49(1). 79-101.

  • Lazard Gilbert. 2002. Transitivity revisited as an example of a more strict approach in typological research. Folia Linguistica 36(3-4). 141-190.

  • Lehmann Christian. 2016. Latin causativization in typological perspective. In Poccetti Paolo (ed.) Latinitatis rationes: Descriptive and historical accounts for the Latin language 917-943. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

  • Levin Beth & Rappaport Hovav Malka. 1995. Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

  • Levshina Natalia. 2016. Finding the best fit for direct and indirect causation: a typological study. Lingua Posnaniensis 58(2). 65-82.

  • Malchukov Andrej L. 2016. “Ambivalent voice”: Markedness effects in valency change. In Kageyama Taro & Jacobsen Wesley M. (eds.) Transitivity and valency alternations: Studies on Japanese and beyond 389-422. (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 297). Berlin: De Gruyter.

  • Nau Nicole. 2015. Morphological causatives in contemporary Latvian. In Holvoet Axel & Nau Nicole (eds.) Voice and argument structure in Baltic 99-145. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Nedjalkov Vladimir P. & Sil’nickij Georgij G. 1969. Tipologija morfologičeskogo i leksičeskogo kauzativov [Typology of morphological and lexical causatives]. In Xolodovič Aleksandr A. (ed.) Tipologija kauzativnyx konstrukcij [Typology of causative constructions] 20-60. Moskva: Nauka. (English translation: Nedyalkov & Silnitsky 1973)

  • Nedjalkov Vladimir P. 1966. Ob areal’nyx universalijax (na materiale kauzativnyx glagolov) [Concerning areal universals (on the material of causative verbs)]. In: Konferencija po problemam izučenija universal’nyx i areal’nyx svojstv jazyka: Tezisy 55-58. Moskva: Nauka.

  • Nedjalkov Vladimir P. 1969. Nekotorye verojatnostnye universalii v glagol’nom slovoobrazovanii. [Some probabilistic universals in verbal word-formation.] In Vardul’ I.F. (ed.) Jazykovye universalii i lingvističeskaja tipologija 106-114. Moskva: Nauka.

  • Nedyalkov Vladimir P. & Silnitsky Georgy G. 1973. The typology of morphological and lexical causatives. In Kiefer Ferenc (ed.) Trends in Soviet theoretical linguistics 1-32. Dordrecht: Reidel.

  • Nichols Johanna & Peterson David A. & Barnes Jonathan. 2004. Transitivizing and detransitivizing languages. Linguistic Typology 8(2). 149-211.

  • Perlmutter David M. 1978. Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis. Proceedings of the 4th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 157-189. Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.

  • Plank Frans & Lahiri Aditi. 2015. Macroscopic and microscopic typology: Basic Valence Orientation more pertinacious than meets the naked eye. Linguistic Typology 19(1). 1-54.

  • Rice Keren. 2000. Voice and valency in the Athapaskan family. In Dixon R.M.W. & Aikhenvald Alexandra Y. (eds.) Changing valency: Case studies in transitivity 173-235. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Shibatani Masayoshi & Pardeshi Prashant. 2002. The causative continuum. In Shibatani Masayoshi (ed.) The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation 85-126. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Shibatani Masayoshi. 2016. The role of morphology in valency alternation phenomena. In Kageyama Taro & Jacobsen Wesley M. (eds.) Transitivity and valency alternations: Studies on Japanese and beyond vol. 297 445-478. (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs). Berlin: De Gruyter.

  • Song Jae Jung. 1996. Causatives and causation: A universal-typological perspective. London: Longman.

  • Suttles Wayne P. 2004. Musqueam reference grammar. Vancouver: UBC Press.

  • Velázquez-Castillo Maura. 2002. Guaraní causative constructions. In Shibatani Masayoshi (ed.) The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation 507-534. Amsterdam: Benjamins.

  • Wright Saundra K. 2001. Internally caused and externally caused change of state verbs. Ph.D. dissertation Northwestern University.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.22

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.124
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.828

Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 725 250 7
PDF Downloads 393 179 7