Chapter published in:
Uralic Essive and the Expression of Impermanent State
Edited by Casper de Groot
[Typological Studies in Language 119] 2017
► pp. 497–552

The typology of the essive in the Uralic Languages

This chapters presents the typology of the essive in the Uralic languages. The input for the typology is the detailed information about the essive in nineteen Uralic languages presented in the former chapters of this volume. The chapter specifically investigates the distribution of the essives and also the opposition between permanent and impermanent state in non-verbal predications. The typological variation is discussed within the linguistic domains of non-verbal main predication, secondary predication, complementation, and manner, temporal, and circumstantial adverbial phrases. The use of the marker in the essive sense (associated with state) is contrasted with its use in expressing the translative sense (associated with change). The syntactic position of elements marked by the essive is discussed in relation to the position of focus constituents. The conclusions summarize the major findings of this volume.
Keywords: linguistic typology, Uralic languages, essive case, translative case, depictive, impermanent state, non-verbal predication, focus
Published online: 30 November 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.119.21deg
References

References

Ariste, Paul
1968 A Grammar of the Votic Language. Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard
1988 General features of the Uralic Languages. In Sinor (ed.), 451–477.Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C.
1980 Non-verbal predicates. In Studies in Functional Grammar, Simon C. Dik, 90–112. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Erelt, Mati & Metslang, Helle
2003 Case marking of the predicative in Estonian. Linguistica Uralica 39(3): 166–174.Google Scholar
Eriksen, Pål Kristian
2006 On the Typology and the Semantics of Non-verbal Predication. PhD dissertation, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
de Groot, Casper. Forthcoming. The essive in Hixkaryana.
Haspelmath, Martin
2009 Terminology. In The Oxford Handbook of Case, Andrej Malchukov & Andrew Spencer (eds), 505–517. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees & Mackenzie, J. Lachlan
2008 Functional Discourse Grammar. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Himmelmann, Nikolaus P. & Schultze-Berndt, Eva F.
2005 Issues in the syntax and semantics of participant-oriented adjuncts. An introduction. In Himmelmann & Schultze-Berndt (eds), 1–67. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005 Secondary Predication and Adverbial Modification. The Typology of Depictives. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Meira, Sérgio & Gildea, Spike
2009 Property concepts in the Cariban family: Adjectives, adverbs and/or nouns? In The Linguistics of Endangered Languages – Contributions to Morphology and Morphosyntax, W. Leo Wetzels (ed.), 95–133. Utrecht: LOT Occasional Series.Google Scholar
Miestamo, Matti, Tamm, Anne & Wagner-Nagy, Beáta
2015 Negation in Uralic languages – Introduction. In Negation in Uralic languages, Matti Miestamo, Anne Tamm & Beáta Wagner-Nagy (eds), 1–41. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, Joanna
1978 Secondary predicates. Berkeley Linguistics Society 4: 114–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nikolaeva, Irina
2014 A Grammar of Tundra Nenets. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nose, Masahiko
2003 Word order positions of the Finno-Ugric essive case forms. Asian and African Languages and Linguistics 2: 103–114.Google Scholar
Planck, Franz
1985 Prädikativ und Koprädikativ. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 13(2): 154–185.Google Scholar
Pustet, Regina
2003 Copulas. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schultze-Berndt, Eva F. & Himmelmann, Nikolaus P.
2004 Depictive secondary predicates. Linguistic Typology 8(1): 59–131. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Siegl, Florian
2013 Materials on Forest Enets. An Indigenous Language of Northern Siberia [MSFOu 267]. Helsinki: Finno-Ugric Society.Google Scholar
Stassen, Leon
1997 Intransitive predication. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2001 Nonverbal predication in the Circum-Baltic languages. In Circum-Baltic Languages, Vol 2: Grammar and Typology [Studies in Language Companion Series 55], Östen Dahl & Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm (eds), 569–590. Amsterdam: John Benjamins CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Stump, Gregory T.
1985 The Semantic Variability of Absolute Constructions. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turunen, Rigina
2013 Linguistic questionnaire Essive; Erzya. Ms.Google Scholar
Vilkuna, Maria
1998 Word order in European Uralic. In Constituent Order in the Languages of Europe, Anna Siewierska (ed.), 173–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wetzer, Harrie
1996 The Typology of Adjectival Predication. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1981 The functional grammar of teaching verbs. In Perspectives on Functional Grammar, Teun Hoekstra, Harry van der Hulst & Michael Moortgat (eds), 203–231. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar