Cover not available
Article published In:
Advances in research on semantic roles
Edited by Seppo Kittilä and Fernando Zúñiga
[Studies in Language 38:3] 2014
► pp. 605–647

Functive phrases in typological and diachronic perspective

| University of Lyon
This paper is concerned with a particular semantic type of noun phrases in secondary predicate function, illustrated by as a negotiator in He was sent as a negotiator. It explores the cross-linguistic regularities in the polysemy patterns characteristic of the markers and constructions having the expression of this meaning as one of their possible uses, and discusses the grammaticalization paths in which they are involved.
Keywords: functive, secondary predicate, grammaticalization, essive, polysemy
Published online: 30 September 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.38.3.07cre
References (53)
Alekseev, Mikhail. 1988. Sravnitel’no-istoričeskaja morfologija avaro-andijskix jazykov [Comparative-historical morphology of Avar-Andic languages]. Moscow: Nauka.Google Scholar
Aquilina, Joseph. 1999. English-Maltese dictionary, Vol. 1 (A-D)1. Valletta: Midsea books.Google Scholar
Arkad’ev, Peter, Jurij Lander, Aleksandr Letučij & Nina Sumbatova. 2009. Vvedenie: Osnovnye svedenija ob adygejskom jazyke [Introduction: Basic information on the Adyghe language]. In Peter Arkad’ev, Aleksandr Letučij, Nina Sumbatova & Jakov Testelec (eds.), Aspekty polisintetizma: očerki po grammatike adygejskogo jazyka [Aspects of polysynthetism: Essays on the grammar of the Adyghe language],17–120.Moscow: Rossijkij gosudarstvennyj gumanitarnyj universitet.Google Scholar
Balogh, Judit. 2000. A névszóragozás [Noun inflection]. In Borbála Keszler. (ed.), Magyar grammatika [Hungarian grammar], 183–208.Budapest: Nemzeti Tankönyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Bartels, Hauke. 2008. Sekundäre Predikation im Niedersorbischen. In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 19–39.Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Boeder, Winfried. 2005. Depictives in Kartvelian. Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Eva Schultze-Berndt (eds.), Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification: The Typology of Depictives, 201–236. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis. 2008. Predicative argument marking: The case of transformation verbs. Conference: Cognitive and functional perspectives on dynamic tendencies in Languages, Tartu. (Electronic version available at [URL])
. 2014. Functive-transformative marking in Akhvakh and other Caucasian languages. In Pamjati Alexandra, Evgen'eviča Kibrika, Vladimir Plungian, Michael Daniel, Elena Ljutikova, Sergej Tatevosov and Olga Fedorocva (eds), Jazyk, Konstanty, Peremennye, 430–449. Saint Petersburg: Aletja.Google Scholar
Daget, J., M. Konipo & M. Sanankoua. 1953. La langue Bozo. Limoges.Google Scholar
É. Kiss, Katalin, Ferenc Kiefer & Péter Siptár. 2003. Új Magyar Nyelvtan [New Hungarian grammar]. Budapest: Osiris Kiadó.Google Scholar
Erelt, Mati & Helle Metslang. 2003. Case marking of the predicative in Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 39(3). 166–174.Google Scholar
Ernout, Alfred & François Thomas. 1953. Syntaxe latine, 2nd edn. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Gimbatov, Magomed. 2006. Avar-ʕurus slovar [Avar-Russian dictionary]. Makhachkala.Google Scholar
Groot, Casper de. 2008. Depictive secondary predication in Hungarian. In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 69–96. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2010. Uralic Essive. Workshop ‘Uralic case’, 14th International Morphology Meeting . Budapest.
Grünthal, Riho. 2003. Finnic adpositions and cases in change. Helsinki: Société finno-ougrienne.Google Scholar
Hagège, Claude. 2010. Adpositions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1993. A grammar of Lezgian. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Oda Buchholz. 1998. Equative and similative constructions. In Johan van der Auwera (ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe, 277–334. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hewson, John & Vit Bubenik. 2006. From case to adposition: The development of configurational syntax in Indo-European languages. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Eva Schultze-Berndt. 2005. Issues in the syntax and semantics of participant-oriented adjuncts: An introduction. In Nikolaus P. Himmelmann & Eva Schultze-Berndt (eds.), Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification: The Typology of Depictives, 1–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds.). 2005. Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification: The Typology of Depictives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holton, David, Peter Mackridge & Irene Philippaki-Warburton. 1997. Greek: A comprehensive grammar of the modern language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hualde, José Ignacio & Jon Ortiz de Urbina. 2003. A grammar of Basque. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuwae, Kunio. 1989. Manuel de japonais. Paris: L’asiathèque.Google Scholar
Lafitte, Pierre. 1962. Grammaire basque (navarro-labourdin littéraire). Bayonne: Editions des “Amis du musée basque” et “Ikas”.Google Scholar
Le Bris, Pierre & André Prost. 1981. Dictionnaire bobo-français. Paris: SELAF.Google Scholar
Lelkes, István. 1967. Manuel de hongrois. Budapest: Tankönyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Lutkat, Florence-Silvia & Cornelius Hasselblatt. 1993. Estnisch intensiv: das Lehrbuch der estnischen Sprache. Hamburg: Baltica.Google Scholar
Magomedova, Patimat & Rašidat Xalidova. 2001. Karatinsko-russkij slovar’ [Karata-Russian dictionary]. Maxačkala: Dagestanskij Naučnyj Centr Rossiskoj Akademii Nauk.Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, Line. 2011. Copular clauses. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger & Paul Portner (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, 1805–1829. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Musaev, Magomed-Said. 1987. Slovoizmenitel’nye kategorii darginskogo jazyka (kategorii grammatičeskix klassov, abstraktnye padeži) [Inflectional categories in Dargwa (grammatical classes, abstract cases)]. Makhachkala.Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1978. Secondary predicates. Berkeley Linguistics Society 41. 114–127. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1983. Predicate instrumentals and agreement in Lithuanian: A contrastive analysis. Papers in Linguistics 16(3/4). 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Onikki-Rantajääskö, Tiina. 2006. Metonymy in locatives of state. In Marja-Liisa Helasvuo & Lyle Campbell (eds.), Grammar from the human perspective: Case, space and person in Finnish, 67–100. Amsterdam: Benjamins DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinkster, Harm. 1990. Latin Syntax and Semantics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. 1991. Praedicativum. In Christian Touratier (ed.), Compléments prédicatifs et attributs du complément d’objet en Latin, 72–78. Aix-Marseille: Publications de l’Université de Provence.Google Scholar
Rakhilina, Ekaterina & Elena Tribushinina. 2011. The Russian instrumental-of-comparison: Constructional approach. In Laura Janda & Marcin Grygiel (eds.), Slavic linguistics in a cognitive framework, 145–174. Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Riese, Timothy. 1992. Der Translativ in den uralischen Sprachen 1. Linguistica Uralica 281. 251–261.Google Scholar
. 1993. Der Translativ in den uralischen Sprachen 2. Linguistica Uralica 291. 1–20.Google Scholar
Rose, Françoise. 2011. Grammaire de l’émérillon teko, une langue tupi-guarani de Guyane française. Louvain: Peeters.Google Scholar
Schönig, Claus. 2008. Notizen zu türksprachigen Gerundialformen (Konverbialformen) als verbale Kerne von Rollenprädikaten. In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 327–338. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Christoph. 2008. Adverbial modification and secondary predicates in Turkish: A typological perspective. In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 339–358. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Schroeder, Christoph, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.). 2008. Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16). Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Schultze-Berndt, Eva & Nikolaus P. Himmelmann. 2004. Depictive secondary predicates. Linguistic Typology 8(1). 59–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seki, Lucy 2000. Gramática do Kamaiurá, língua Tupi-Guarani do Alto Xingu. Campinas: Editora da Unicamp.Google Scholar
Sohn, Ho-Min 1999. The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Šarić, Ljiljana. 2008. Secondary predicates in Croatian. In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 295–325. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Turunen, Rigina. 2011. Double encoding of nominal and adjectival predicates: A study of the nominative-translative switch in Erzya. SUSA/JSFOu 931. 385–415.Google Scholar
Veksler, Bunim X. & Vladimir A. Jurik. 1975. Samoučitel’ latyšskogo jazyka. Riga: Zvaigzne.Google Scholar
Vydrin, Arseniy. 2008. Are there depictives in Adighe? In Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds.), Secondary predicates in Eastern European languages and beyond (Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16), 423–445.Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar
Williams, Edwin. 1980. Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 121. 203–238.Google Scholar
Cited by (26)

Cited by 26 other publications

Zhang, Ning
2024. Light predicate raising in the Mandarin post-VP adverbial nominal constructions. Language and Linguistics. 語言暨語言學 DOI logo
Brosig, Benjamin
2021. Expressing intent, imminence and ire by attributing speech/thought in Mongolian. Folia Linguistica 55:2 ► pp. 433 ff. DOI logo
Brosig, Benjamin
2021. Expressing intent, imminence and ire by attributing speech/thought in Mongolian. Folia Linguistica 0:0 DOI logo
dalla Chiesa, Simone
2020. Troubles on the Border. Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie orientale :56 DOI logo
Forker, Diana
2019. The impact of language contact on Hinuq. STUF - Language Typology and Universals 72:2 ► pp. 221 ff. DOI logo
Jeannot-Fourcaud, Béatrice
2019. L’unité kon en créoles guadeloupéen et martiniquais : Analyse multifactorielle de la comparaison d’égalité. Faits de Langues 50:1 ► pp. 111 ff. DOI logo
Gildea, Spike
2018. Chapter 14. Reconstructing the copulas and nonverbal predicate constructions in Cariban. In Nonverbal Predication in Amazonian Languages [Typological Studies in Language, 122], ► pp. 365 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Niina Ning
2018. Non-canonical objects as event kind-classifying elements. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36:4 ► pp. 1395 ff. DOI logo
Caron, Bernard
2017. Chapter 6. Comparison, similarity and simulation in Zaar, a Chadic language of Nigeria. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 167 ff. DOI logo
Crass, Joachim
2017. Chapter 15. Similarity and related functions in Libido. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 387 ff. DOI logo
Darmon, Chloé
2017. Chapter 14. The morpheme ‑(ä)ŋäin Xamtanga. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 359 ff. DOI logo
de Groot, Casper
2017. Chapter 1. Discovering the assignment. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Hynönen, Emmi
2017. Chapter 2. The essive in Finnish. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 29 ff. DOI logo
Metslang, Helle & Liina Lindström
2017. Chapter 3. The essive in Estonian. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
Roulon-Doko, Paulette
2017. Chapter 8. Expressing comparison in Gbaya, a Ubangian language of the Central African Republic. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 213 ff. DOI logo
Schultze‐Berndt, Eva
2017. Depictive Secondary Predicates in Typological Perspective. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Second Edition, ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Schulze, Wolfgang
2017. Chapter 2. Toward a cognitive typology oflike-expressions. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Treis, Yvonne
2017. Chapter 4. Similative morphemes as purpose clause markers in Ethiopia and beyond. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 91 ff. DOI logo
Treis, Yvonne & Martine Vanhove
2017. Introduction. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Vanhove, Martine
2017. Chapter 7. Similative, equative, and comparative constructions in Beja (North-Cushitic). In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 189 ff. DOI logo
Ylikoski, Jussi
2017. Chapter 9. The essive in North Saami. In Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State [Typological Studies in Language, 119], ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Ylikoski, Jussi
2017. Chapter 10. Similarity, equality and the like in North Saami. In Similative and Equative Constructions [Typological Studies in Language, 117], ► pp. 259 ff. DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2016. Tangut, Gyalrongic, Kiranti and the nature of person indexation in Sino-Tibetan/Trans-Himalayan. Linguistics Vanguard 2:1 DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2016. Complementation in Japhug Gyalrong. Linguistics of the Tibeto-Burman Area 39:2 ► pp. 222 ff. DOI logo
Jacques, Guillaume
2023. Estimative constructions in cross-linguistic perspective. Linguistic Typology 27:1 ► pp. 157 ff. DOI logo
Daniel, Michael A.
2014. Against the addressee of speech – Recipient metaphor. In Perspectives on Semantic Roles [Typological Studies in Language, 106], ► pp. 205 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 november 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.