Cover not available
Part of
Historical Linguistics 2019: Selected papers from the 24th International Conference on Historical Linguistics, Canberra, 1–5 July 2019
Edited by Bethwyn Evans, Maria Kristina Gallego and Luisa Miceli
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 367] 2024
► pp. 330–366

Chapter 13
A cognitive-typological perspective on the origins of causative‑applicative polysemy

| University of New Mexico
In many languages, one morpheme functions both as a causative and as an applicative. Researchers such as Croft (1991) and Tuggy (1988) have noted the conceptual similarities between these functions, but the origins and conceptual mechanisms of change which cross-linguistically lead towards such polysemies have not been studied. This study investigates 88 languages, in which 11 polysemous causative-applicative morphemes were found. Extensions from etymological applicatives towards a causative function, and vice versa, are attested, although no etymological causatives which have become productive as applicatives were found. I argue that the conventionalisation of implicatures and other mechanisms of change allow such extensions to advance gradually over a continuum of valency-increasing functions, or more directly between conceptually further removed causatives and benefactive applicatives.
Keywords: causative, applicative, valency, semantic change, diachronic typology, cognitive grammar
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Definitions
    • 2.1Valency in Cognitive Grammar
    • 2.2Causatives in Cognitive Grammar
    • 2.3Benefactive/directive applicatives in Cognitive Grammar
  • 3.Intermediate cases
    • 3.1Because-of constructions
    • 3.2Comitative applicatives and sociative causatives
    • 3.3Instrumental applicatives
    • 3.4Summary
  • 4.Previous literature and hypotheses
  • 5.Methodology and data
  • 6.Paths towards causative-applicative polysemy
    • 6.1Extensions from causative to applicative
      • 6.1.1Pech
      • 6.1.2Bongu
    • 6.2Extensions from applicative to causative
      • 6.2.1Temne
      • 6.2.2Trukese
      • 6.2.3Lahu
      • 6.2.4Pangasinan
    • 6.3Other
    • 6.4Summary
  • 7.Discussion: Cognitive mechanisms of extension
    • 7.1Applicative extensions of causative morphemes
      • 7.1.1Pech
      • 7.1.2Bongu
    • 7.2Causative extensions of applicative morphemes
      • 7.2.1Temne
      • 7.2.2Trukese
      • 7.2.3Lahu
      • 7.2.4Pangasinan
    • 7.3Summary
  • 8.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.367.13van
References (66)
References
Austin, Peter K. 1997. Causatives and applicatives in Australian Aboriginal languages. In Kazuto Matsumura & Tooru Hayasi (eds.), The dative and related phenomena, 165–225. Tokyo: Hituzi Syobo.Google Scholar
Benton, Richard A. 1971a. Pangasinan reference grammar (Pali Language Texts: Philippines). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1971b. Pangasinan dictionary (Pali Language Texts: Philippines). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1971c. Spoken Pangasinan (Pali Language Texts: Philippines). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press.Google Scholar
Blust, Robert A. 2003. Three notes on early Austronesian morphology. Oceanic Linguistics 42(2). 438–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bostoen, Koen & Léon Mundeke. 2011. The causative/applicative syncretism in Mbuun (Bantu B87, DRC): Semantic split or phonemic merger? Journal of African Languages and Linguistics 32. 179–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bright, William. 1957. The Karok language. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Burhanuddin, Burhanuddin, Nur Ahmadi & Ratna Yulida. 2017. Reflex PAN to Buli in North Maluku. Advances in Social Science, Education, and Humanities Research 148. 113–121. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: Tense, aspect, and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Courtz, Hendrik. 2008. A Carib grammar and dictionary. Leiden: Universiteit Leiden dissertation.
Craig, Colette G. 1989. A grammar of Rama. Université de Lyon Report to National Science Foundation, BNS 8511156. Unpublished manuscript.
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2012. Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William & David Alan Cruse. 2004. Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cyffer, Norbert. 1998. A sketch of Kanuri. Cologne: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2007. Kanuri morphology. In Alan S. Kaye (ed.), Morphologies of Asia and Africa, vol. 2, 1089–1126. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durie, Mark. 1988. Verb serialization and “verbal prepositions” in Oceanic languages. Oceanic Linguistics 27(1/2). 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dyen, Isidore. 1965. A sketch of Trukese grammar. New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society.Google Scholar
Frank, Paul S. 1985. A grammar of Ika (Chibchan, Colombia). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.
Goodenough, Ward H. & Hiroshi Sugita. 1980. Trukese-English dictionary. Pwpwuken tettenin fóós: Chuuk-Ingenes. Philadelphia, PA: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Guillaume, Antoine & Françoise Rose. 2010. Sociative causative markers in South American languages: A possible areal feature. In Franck Floricic (ed.), Essais de typologie et de linguistique générale. Mélanges offerts à Denis Creissels [Essays in typology and general linguistics. Mixes offered to Denis Creissels], 383–402. Lyon: ENS Editions.Google Scholar
Hanke, August. 1909. Grammatik und Vokabularium der Bongu-Sprache [Grammar and vocabulary of the Bongu language]. Berlin: Georg Reimer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Thomas Müller-Bardey. 2004. Valence change. In Geert Booij et al. (eds.), Morphology, vol. 2, 1130–1145. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hemmings, Charlotte. 2013. Causatives and applicatives: The case for polysemy in Javanese. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics 16. 167–94.Google Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. 2005. The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar: Typological characteristics. In Alexander Adelaar & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann (eds.), The Austronesian languages of Asia and Madagascar, 110–181. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holmer, Nils. 1947. Critical and comparative grammar of the Cuna language (Etnologiska Studier 14). Gothenburg: Elanders Boktryckeri Aktiebolag.Google Scholar
Holt, Dennis. 1989. On Paya causatives. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 8. 3–11.Google Scholar
. 1999. Pech (Paya). Munich: Lincom.Google Scholar
Hyman, Larry M. 2007. Niger-Congo verb extensions: Overview and discussion. In Doris L. Payne & Jaime Peña (eds.), Annual Conference on African Linguistics (ACAL 37), 149–63. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
2014. Reconstructing the Niger-Congo verb extension paradigm: What’s cognate, copied or renewed? In Martine Robbeets & Walter Bisang (eds.), Paradigm change in the Transeurasian languages and beyond, 103–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ichihashi-Nakayama, Kumiko. 1996. The “applicative” in Hualapai: Its functions and meanings. Cognitive Linguistics 7(2). 227–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jerro, Kyle. 2017. The causative-instrumental syncretism. Journal of Linguistics 53. 751–788. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanu, Sullay M. 2012. Valence-increasing morphology in Temne. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta dissertation.
Kimenyi, Alexandre. 1980. A relational grammar of Kinyarwanda. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
König, Ekkehard & Elizabeth C. Traugott. 1988. Pragmatic strengthening and semantic change: The conventionalizing of conversational implicatures. In Werner Hüllen & Rainer Schulze (eds.), Understanding the lexicon: Meaning, sense, and world knowledge in lexical semantics, 110–124. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Concept, image and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar (Cognitive Linguistics Research 1). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2008. Cognitive Grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017. Cognitive Grammar. In Barbara Dancygier (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, 262–283. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LaPolla, Randy J. 2016. Overview of Sino-Tibetan morphosyntax. In Graham Thurgood & Randy J. LaPolla (eds.), The Sino-Tibetan languages, 2nd edn., 29–50. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loughnane, Robyn. 2009. A grammar of Oksapmin. Melbourne, Australia: University of Melbourne dissertation.
Maan, G. 1951. Proeve van een Bulische spraakkunst [Essay on Buli Grammar]. ’s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Matisoff, James A. 1973. The grammar of Lahu. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
1976. Lahu causative constructions: Case hierarchies and the morphology/syntax cycle in a Tibeto-Burman perspective. Syntax and Semantics 6. 413–442. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. English-Lahu lexicon. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Meira, Sérgio. 1999. A grammar of Tiriyó. Houston, TX: Rice University dissertation.
Nzang-Bie, Yolande. 2008. La dérivation causative dans les langues bantu du groupe A70 [The causative derivation in the Bantu languages of the A70 group]. Africana Linguistica 14. 85–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Olaya Perdomo, Noel. 2000. Descripción preliminar del sistema verbal de la lengua kogui (o kawgi) [Preliminary description of the verbal system of the Kogui (or Kawgi) language]. In María Stella González de Pérez & María Luisa Rodríguez de Montes (eds.), Lenguas indígenas de Colombia: Una visión descriptiva, 781–787. Santafé de Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.Google Scholar
Pache, Matthias. 2018. Contributions to Chibchan historical linguistics. Leiden: Universiteit Leiden dissertation.
Quesada Pacheco, Miguel Ángel. 2011. La causatividad en el boruca [Causativity in Boruca]. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 30. 91–113.Google Scholar
. 2014. La leyenda del sisimite en lengua Pech [The legend of Sisimite in the Pech language]. Estudios de Lingüística Chibcha 33. 317–350.Google Scholar
Robinson, Laura C. 2008. Dupaningan Agta: Grammar, vocabulary, and texts. Manoa, HI: University of Hawai’i dissertation.
Roddy, Kevin M. 2007. A sketch grammar of Satawalese, the language of Satawal island, Yap State, Micronesia. Manoa, HI: University of Hawai’i dissertation.
Rubino, Carl. 2000. Ilocano dictionary and grammar. Ilocano-English, English-Ilocano. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shibatani, Masayoshi & Prashant Pardeshi. 2002. The causative continuum. In Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation, 85–126. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shipley, William F. 1964. Maidu grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Shipley, William F. & Richard A. Smith. 1979. Proto-Maidun stress and vowel length: The reconstruction of “one, two, three,” and “four”. International Journal of American Linguistics 45(2). 171–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Song, Jae Jung. 1990. On the rise of causative affixes: A universal-typological perspective. Lingua 82. 151–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tallman, Adam J. 2018. A grammar of Chácobo (Pano), a Southern Pano language of the Northern Bolivian Amazon. Austin, TX: University of Texas dissertation.
Tavares, Petronila da Silva. 2005. A grammar of Wayana. Houston, TX: Rice University dissertation.
Tuggy, David. 1988. Náhuatl causative/applicatives in Cognitive Grammar. In Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, 587–618. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uldall, Hans J. 1960. Miscellaneous notes on Maidu grammar. Uldall.004.020, Survey of California and other Indian Languages, University of California, Berkeley. [URL]. [Accessed 24 August 2020].Google Scholar
Ultan, Russell. 1967. Konkow grammar. Berkeley, CA: University of California dissertation.
VanBik, Kenneth. 2002. Three types of causative constructions in Hakha Lai. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 25(2). 99–122.Google Scholar
Voeltz, Erhard. 1977. Proto Niger-Congo extensions. Los Angeles, CA: University of California dissertation.
Zavala, Roberto. 2002. Olutec causatives and applicatives. In Masayoshi Shibatani (ed.), The grammar of causation and interpersonal manipulation, 245–300. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Z’graggen, John A. 1980. A comparative word list of the Rai Coast languages, Madang province, Papua New Guinea (Pacific Linguistics Series D — no. 30). Canberra: The Australian National University.Google Scholar