Cover not available
Part of
Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology
Edited by Luca Alfieri, Giorgio Francesco Arcodia and Paolo Ramat
[Typological Studies in Language 132] 2021
► pp. 211–248

Chapter 6
Comparative concepts are not a different kind of thing

| University of Munich

This contribution challenges the by now established notion of comparative concepts; in particular, it can be read as a (delayed) response to Haspelmath (2010). Like Haspelmath’s original paper, the present one is theoretical in essence, with examples used primarily for illustration. My main point is that Haspelmath’s comparative concepts are, despite his claims to the contrary, simply crosslinguistic categories. This point has been made before; however, I offer two new ingredients to the argument: first, an explicit definition of the crucial term instantiation, allowing, among other things, a reaction to Haspelmath’s (2018b) newest defence of comparative concepts, and second, an alternative approach involving multiple monotonic inheritance. The contribution as a whole, though being theoretical, strives to argue as framework-neutrally as possible; in particular I remain agnostic about the existence and nature of Universal Grammar in any sense.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.A critical close reading of Haspelmath (2010a)
    • 2.1Short summary of Haspelmath (2010a)
    • 2.2Discussion of Haspelmath (2010a)
      • 2.2.1The core arguments
      • 2.2.2Haspelmath’s suggestions for concrete comparative concepts
        • Excursus
  • 3.An alternative: Monotonic, multiple inheritance
    • 3.1Background
    • 3.2Blueprint
    • 3.3Implementation
      • 3.3.1A guided tour through Figure 11
      • 3.3.2Beyond Figure 11
  • 4.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgments
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.06rei
References
Alfieri, Luca
2021 Parts of speech, comparative concepts and Indo-European linguistics. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 132]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, David M.
2004 How do particulars stand to universals? In Oxford Studies in Metaphysics 1, Dean W. Zimmerman (ed.), 139–154. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Biggs, Bruce
1961 The structure of New Zealand Maaori. Anthropological Linguistics 3(3): 1–54.Google Scholar
Brown, Cecil H.
2013 Hand and arm. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: MPI for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] (18 December 2018).Google Scholar
Brown, Dunstan & Hippisley, Andrew
2012 Network Morphology. A Defaults-based Theory of Word Structure [Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 133]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam
1957 Syntactic Structures [Janua Linguarum 4]. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clements, George N.
1985 The geometry of phonological features. Phonology Yearbook 2: 225–252. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William
2001 Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Word classes, parts of speech, and syntactic argumentation. Linguistic Typology 9(3): 431–441.Google Scholar
Culicover, Peter W.
1999 Syntactic Nuts. Hard Cases, Syntactic Theory, and Language Acquisition [Foundations of Syntax 1]. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Daelemans, Walter, Gerald, Gazdar & De Smedt, Koenraad
1992 Inheritance in natural language processing. Computational Linguistics 18(2): 205–218.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen
2016 Thoughts on language-specific and crosslinguistic entities. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 427–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S.
2005 Order of adjective and noun. In The World Atlas of Language Structures, Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil & Bernard Comrie (eds), 354–357. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2013 Order of adjective and noun. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: MPI for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] (16 January 2019).Google Scholar
Elbert, Samuel H. & Pukui, Mary Kawena
1979 Hawaiian Grammar. Honolulu HI: The University Press of Hawaii. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gair, James W.
1970 Colloquial Sinhalese Clause Structures [Janua Linguarum; Series Practica 83]. The Hague: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gerner, Matthias & Bisang, Walter
2010 Social-deixis classifiers in Weining Ahmao. In Rara & Rarissima. Documenting the Fringes of Linguistic Diversity [Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 46], Jan Wohlgemuth & Michael Cysouw (eds), 75–94. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gil, David
2013 Riau Indonesian. A language without nouns and verbs. In Flexible Word Classes. Typological Studies of Underspecified Parts of Speech, Jan Rijkhoff & Eva van Lier (eds), 89–130. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glottolog
[URL] (18 December 2018).
Goddard, Cliff
1982 Case systems and case marking in Australian languages. A new interpretation. Australian Journal of Linguistics 2(2): 167–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1985 A Grammar of Yankunytjatjara. Alice Springs: Institute for Aboriginal Development.Google Scholar
Goddard, Cliff & Wierzbicka, Anna
(eds) 2002 Meaning and Universal Grammar, 1: Theory and Empirical Findings [Studies in Language Companion Series 60]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gross, Maurice
1989 On the failure of Generative Grammar. Language 55(4): 859–885. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris, Vaux, Bert & Wolfe, Andrew
2000 On feature spreading and the representation of place of articulation. Linguistic Inquiry 31(3): 387–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harley, Heidi & Ritter, Elizabeth
2002 Structuring the bundle. A universal morphosyntactic feature geometry. In Pronouns. Grammar and Representation [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 52], Horst J. Simon & Heike Wiese (eds), 23–39. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin
2008 Parametric versus functional explanations of syntactic universals. In The Limits of Syntactic Variation [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 132], Theresa Biberauer (ed.), 75–107. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010a Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3): 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2010b The interplay between comparative concepts and descriptive categories (Reply to Newmeyer). Language 86(3): 696–699. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 The indeterminacy of word segmentation and the nature of morphology and syntax. Folia Linguistica 45(1): 31–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018a Facing the challenge of general linguistics when nature doesn’t help us. Diversity Linguistics Comment of 18 February. [URL] (7 February 2019).
2018b How comparative concepts and descriptive linguistic categories are different. In Aspects of Linguistic Variation, Daniël Van Olmen, Tanja Mortelmans & Frank Brisard (eds), 83–114. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021 Towards standardization of morphosyntactic terminology for general linguistics. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 132]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hengeveld, Kees
1992 Non-verbal Predication. Theory, Typology, Diachrony [Functional Grammar Series 15]. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013 Parts-of-speech systems as a basic typological determinant. In Flexible Word Classes. Typological Studies of Underspecified Parts of Speech, Jan Rijkhoff & Eva van Lier (eds), 31–55. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Ronald M.
2003 Syntax. In The Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics, Ruslan Mitkov (ed.), 70–90. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Karlsson, Fred
2015 Finnish. An Essential Grammar [Routledge Essential Grammars], 3rd edn. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Jong-Bok
2016 The Syntactic Structures of Korean. A Construction Grammar Perspective. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klein, Wolfgang
1994 Time in Language [Germanic Linguistics]. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Koch, Harold
2006 Kaytetye. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd edn, Keith Brown (ed.), 170–172. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin
1997 Turkish [Descriptive Grammars]. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lander, Yuri & Arkadiev, Peter
2016 On the right of being a comparative concept. Linguistic Typology 20(2): 403–416. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, Que
1997 Dative Constructions and Case Theory in Korean. PhD dissertation, Simon Fraser University.
Lehmann, Christian
2018 Linguistic concepts and categories in language description and comparison. In Typology, Acquisition, Grammaticalization Studies [Materiali Linguistici 79], Marin Chini & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 27–50. Milano: Franco Angeli. [URL] (9 May 2019).Google Scholar
Lieb, Hans-Heinrich
2021 Theories of language, language comparison, and grammatical description. Correcting Haspelmath. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language 132]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (This volume) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maddieson, Ian
2018 Is phonological typology possible without (universal) categories? In Phonological Typology [Phonology and Phonetics 23], Larry M. Hyman & Frans Plank (eds), 107–125. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maiden, Martin
2009 From pure phonology to pure morphology. The reshaping of the Romance verb. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes 38: 45–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McGinn, Colin
2012 Truth by Analysis. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith A.
2016 On linguistic categories. In Linguistic Typology 20(2): 417–425. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Newmeyer, Frederick J.
2010 On comparative concepts and descriptive categories: A reply to Haspelmath. Language 86(3): 688–695. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quine, Willard van Orman
1960 Word and Object [Series in Communication]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reiner, Tabea
2014 Lexical and grammatical meaning. Revisited. In Semantics and Beyond. Philosophical and Linguistic Investigations [Philosophical Analysis 57], Piotr Stalmaszczyk (ed), 231–240. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Variation in non-finiteness and temporality from a canonical perspective. In Morphological Variation. Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives [Studies in Language Companion Series 207], Antje Dammel & Oliver Schallert (eds), 283–310. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riemer, Nick
2006 Reductive paraphrase and meaning. A critique of Wierzbickian semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 29(3): 347–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rijkhoff, Jan
2016 Crosslinguistic categories in morphosyntactic typology. Problems and prospects. In Linguistic Typology 20(2): 333–363. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schachter, Paul
1996 The Subject in Tagalog. Still None of the Above [UCLA Occasional Papers in Linguistics 15]. Los Angeles: UCLA.Google Scholar
Spencer, Andrew
2008 Does Hungarian have a case system? In Case and Grammatical Relations. Studies in Honour of Bernard Comrie [Typological Studies in Language 81], Greville G. Corbett & Michael Noonan (eds), 35–56. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stassen, Leon
2013 Zero copula for predicate nominals. In The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds). Leipzig: MPI for Evolutionary Anthropology. [URL] (17 January 2019).Google Scholar
van der Auwera, Johan & Sahoo, Kalyanamalini
2015 On comparative concepts and descriptive categories, such as they are. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 47(2): 136–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Lier, Eva & Rijkhoff, Jan
2013 Flexible word classes in linguistic typology and grammatical theory. In Flexible Word Classes. Typological Studies of Underspecified Parts of Speech, Jan Rijkhoff & Eva van Lier (eds), 1–30. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Jr. Robert D.
2005 Exploring the Syntax-semantics Interface. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Jr. Robert D. & LaPolla, Randy
1997 Syntax. Structure, Meaning and Function [Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics]. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wade, Terence
1992 A Comprehensive Russian Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Weber, Benjamin
2019 Eine korpuslinguistische Analyse der Wortarten im Hawai’i (A corpus-linguistic analysis of word classes in Hawaiian). Presentation, Munich, 12 July.
Zaefferer, Dietmar
2007 Language as mind sharing device. Mental and linguistic concepts in a general ontology of everyday life. In Ontolinguistics. How Ontological Status Shapes the Linguistic Coding of Concepts [Trends in Linguistics; Studies and Monographs 176], Andrea C. Schalley & Dietmar Zaefferer (eds), 193–227. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Lieb, Hans-Heinrich
2021. Theories of language, language comparison, and grammatical description. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], ► pp. 137 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 september 2023. 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.