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. 249–278

Chapter 7
Essentials of the unityp research project

Attempt of an overview

| University of Zurich | University of Cologne
| University of Zurich | University of Cologne
| University of Zurich | University of Cologne
This contribution surveys the insights of ‘unityp’ (Language Universals and Typology), a research project initiated and led by Hansjakob Seiler from 1973 until 1992 and further developed by him until 2017. First, an overview of essential concepts and the architecture of the unityp model is given. Of central importance are three levels of research: cognitive-conceptual, general comparative grammar, and individual languages. Then the conceptual and methodological implications are demonstrated by selected analyses. These comprise a summary of Seiler’s latest ‘works in progress’ concerning Identification as well as an application of the crucial abductive method in cross-linguistic investigation, exemplified by the object relation and number.
Article outline
  • 0.Preliminary remarks
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Some essential concepts of unityp
    • 2.1Driving force
    • 2.2Premise (functional setting)
    • 2.3Function
    • 2.4Continua/dimensions
    • 2.5Three areas of research (hierarchical levels)
    • 2.6The three levels and the question of descriptive and comparative categories
  • 3. unityp in progress: New aspects and notions
  • 4.Categories and concepts: In memoriam Hansjakob Seiler
    • 4.1Object relation: Bottom-up procedures and abduction
    • 4.2Number and quantification: Abductive methodology and hermeneutic circle
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 9 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.07sei
References (61)
References
Biermann, Anna. 1982. Die grammatische Kategorie des Numerus. In Apprehension: Das sprachliche Erfassen von Gegenständen, Teil I: Bereich und Ordnung der Phänomene. [Language Universals Series (LUS) 1/1], Hansjakob Seiler & Christian Lehmann (eds), 229–243. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard, Hartmann, Iren, Haspelmath, Martin, Malchukov, Andrej & Wichmann, Søren. 2015. Introduction. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), Vol.1: 3–26.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1969/70. Semantik, innere Sprachform und Tiefenstruktur. In Sprache, Strukturen und Funktionen [Tübinger Beiträge zur Linguistik (TBL) 2], Eugenio Coseriu, 213–224. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
. 1996. Die gegenwärtige Lage in der Sprachforschung. In Coseriu, Ezawa & Kürschner (eds), 3–34.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio, Ezawa, Kennosuke & Kürschner, Wilfried (eds). 1996. Sprachwissenschaftsgeschichte und Sprachforschung: Ost-West-Kolloquium Berlin 1995. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Daneš, František. 1987. On Prague School functionalism in linguistics. In Functionalism in Linguistics [Linguistic & Literary Studies in Eastern Europe 20], René Dirven & Vilém Fried (eds), 5–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durand, Marie-Laure, Lefèvre, Michel & Öhl, Peter (eds). 2020. Tradition und Erneuerung: Sprachen, Sprachvermittlung, Sprachwissenschaft. Akten der 26. Fachtagung der Gesellschaft für Sprache und Sprachen GeSuS e.V. in Montpellier, 5.-7. April 2018. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar
Foley, William A. & Van Valin, Jr. Robert D. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
von der Gabelentz, Georg. 1891[1984]. Die Sprachwissenschaft. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1972/74. Numeral classifiers and substantival number: Problems in the genesis of a linguistic type. Working Papers in Language Universals 9: 1–39. Also in Luigi Heilmann (ed.). 1974. Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Linguists, 17–37. Bologna: il Mulino.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86: 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. Transitivity prominence. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), Vol.1, 131–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. The challenge of making language description and comparison mutually beneficial. Linguistic Typology 20: 299–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. On the scope of the form-frequency correspondence principle. E-Handout of his presentation for Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft, March 8–10, 2017, Saarbrücken.
Kishimoto, Hideki, Kageyama, Taro & Sasaki, Kan. 2015. Valency classes in Japanese. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), Vol.1, 765–805. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 2006. Chapter 1, Cognitive Grammar: Introduction to Concept, image, and symbol. In Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings, Dirk Geeraerts (ed.), 29–68. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 1989. Language description and general comparative grammar. 11th International Congress of Linguists, 13 August 1987, Berlin. In Reference Grammars and Modern Linguistic Theory [Linguistische Arbeiten 226], Gottfried Graustein & Gerhard Leitner (eds), 133–162. Tübingen: Niemeyer. Also available via <[URL]> (last modification: 14 December 2012) (24 February 2020). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Linguistic concepts and categories in language description and comparison. In Typology, Acquisition, Grammaticalization Studies, Marina Chini & Pierluigi Cuzzolin (eds), 27–50. Milano: Franco Angeli.Google Scholar
. 2019. Obituary: Hansjakob Seiler (1920–2018). Linguistic Typology 23: 115–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Löbel, Elisabeth. 2004. Transnumeralität und Numerusopposition im Vietnamesischen: Ein Beitrag zur Dimension der Apprehension. In Premper (ed.), 57–71.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej. 2015. Valency classes and alternations: Parameters of variation. In Malchukov & Comrie (eds), Vol.1, 73–130.Google Scholar
Malchukov, Andrej & Comrie, Bernard (eds). 2015. Valency classes in the world’s languages, 2 Vols. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Mathesius, V. 1936. On some problems of the systematic analysis of grammar. TCLP 6: 95–107. Reprinted in Vachek (ed.), 1964, 306–319.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigeru. 1989. Structure and case marking in japanese. San Diego CA: Academic Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ono, Yoshiko. 2002. Typologische Züge des Japanischen [ Linguistische Arbeiten 453]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Wie wirklich ist Japanisch eine BECOME-Sprache? In Schriften der Gesellschaft für Japanforschung, 39–72. <[URL]> or <[URL]> (14 November 2020)
. 2015. Kontinuum der Objektvarianten im Japanischen. In Seiler (ed.), 45–141.Google Scholar
. 2019. Effizienz-Begriff und Systembezogenheit der sprachlichen Formen am Beispiel der Numerus-Markierung. In Sprachen, Literaturen und Kulturen im Kontakt: Beiträge der 25. Linguistik- und Literaturtage, Miskolc/Ungarn, 2017 (der Gesellschaft für Sprache und Sprachen GeSuS e.V.), Erika Kegyes, Renata Kriston & Manuela Schönenberger (eds), 337–344. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar
. 2020. Fragen von Sein oder Nicht-Sein: Perfektauxiliar, Status nominaler Elemente, Transitivität. In Durand, Lefèvre & Öhl (eds), 61–75.Google Scholar
Premper, Waldfried. 1991. Introduction. In Seiler & Premper (eds), 3–12.Google Scholar
. 2001. Universals of the linguistic representation of situations (‘Participation’). In Language typology and language universals: an international handbook [Handbücher zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft (HSK), 20.2], Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds), 477–495. Berlin: De GruyterGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Kognition und Semantik. In Durand, Lefèvre & Öhl (eds), 171–180.Google Scholar
(ed.). 2004. Dimensionen und Kontinua: Beiträge zu Hansjakob Seilers Universalienforschung [Diversitas Linguarum 4]. Bochum: Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Sadakane, Kumi & Koizumi, Masatoshi. 1995. On the nature of the ‘dative’ particle ni in Japanese. Linguistics 33: 5–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
de Saussure, Ferdinand. 1916/1931. Cours de linguistique générale. Publié par Charles Bally et Albert Sechehaye, 3e édition. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob. 1973. Das Universalienkonzept. In Linguistic workshop I, Hansjakob Seiler (ed.), 6–19. München: Fink.Google Scholar
. 1983. Universals of language. In 16. Weltkongress für Philosophie 1978. Eröffnungs- und Schlusssitzung, Plenarsitzungen, Abendvorträge, Alwin Diemer (ed), 455–465. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
. 1985. Diversity, unity, and their connection. In Language Invariants and Mental Operations: International Interdisciplinary Conference Held at Gummersbach/Cologne, Germany, September 18–23, 1983 [Language Universals Series (LUS), 5], Hansjakob Seiler & Gunter Brettschneider (eds), 4–10. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
. 1986. Apprehension: Language, object, and order, part iii: the universal dimension of apprehension [Language Universals Series (LUS) 1/III]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
. 1988. The dimension of PARTICIPATION. Funcion No. 7. Universidad de Guadalajara.Google Scholar
. 1995. Cognitive-conceptual structure and linguistic encoding: Language universals and typology in the UNITYP framework. In Approaches to language typology, Masayoshi Shibatani & Theodora Bynon (eds), 273–325. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
. 1996. Zum heutigen Stand der Universalienforschung. In Coseriu, Ezawa & Kürschner (eds), 145–167.Google Scholar
. 2000. Language universals research: A synthesis [Language Universals Series (LUS) 8]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
. 2002. Universelles, Generelles, Typisches in der Sprachverwendung. In Linguistik jenseits des Strukturalismus: Akten des II. Ost-West-Kolloquiums, Kennosuke Ezawa, Wilfried Kürschner, Karl H. Rensch & Manfred Ringmacher (eds), 15–20. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
. 2004. Über das Verhältnis von Sprachuniversalienforschung und Sprachtypologie: Rückblick und Ausblick. In Premper (ed.), 1–16.Google Scholar
. 2008a. Universality in language beyond grammar: Selected writings 1990–2007, Thomas Stolz (ed.). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
. 2008b. POSSESSION: Variation and invariants. In Seiler 2008a, 7–36.Google Scholar
. 2008c. Object, language, and communication. In Seiler 2008a, 53–73.Google Scholar
. 2008d. Zum Erklärungspotential kontinuierlicher Ordnungen. In Seiler 2008a, 149–162. French version in Hansjakob Seiler. Notice bio-bibliographique suivie d’un entretien entre Hansjakob Seiler et Jacques François, et de deux exposés de synthèse de Hansjakob Seiler … [Biobibliographies et exposés, Novelle série 9], Jaques François & Pierre Swiggers (eds), 2008, 125–142. Leuven: Centre Internationale de Dialectologie Générale.Google Scholar
. 2015. Vorwort (p. 1), Abstract (English p. 2 and German p. 3), Theoretische Einleitung (pp. 6–13), Das Kontinuum der Varianten der Objektrelation im Deutschen (pp. 14–28), Nachwort (pp. 142–145) and Schlussbemerkung (p. 146) in Seiler (ed.) 2015.Google Scholar
. 2016ff.a. UNITYP. <[URL]> (30 September 2019).
. 2016ff.b. UNITYP weiter. <[URL]> (30 September 2019).
. 2016ff.c. Vom Denkinhalt. <[URL]> (30 September 2019).
Seiler, Hansjakob & Berthould-Papandropoulou, Ioanna. 2015. Das Kontinuum der Varianten der Objektrelation im Neugriechischen. In Seiler (ed.), 29–44.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob & François, Jacques. 2001. Gespräche über Hansjakob Seilers Universalienforschung [Cahier du CRISCO n˚ 3A]. Université de Caen: CRISCO (Centre de Recherches Interlangues sur la Signification en Contexte).Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob (ed.) 2015. Das Konzept der Objektrelation und das Kontinuum ihrer Varianten: Ein muttersprachlicher Zugang. München: Lincom.Google Scholar
Seiler, Hansjakob & Premper, Waldfried (eds). 1991. Partizipation: Das sprachliche Erfassen von Sachverhalten [Language Universals Series (LUS) 6]. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Sybesma, Rint. 2017. Classifiers and countability. Handout of his presentation for ECLL Chinese Linguistic Day, April 7, 2017, University of Zurich.Google Scholar
Unterbeck, Barbara. 1996. Numerus aus der Sicht des Koreanischen. In Coseriu, Ezawa & Kürschner (eds), 145–167.Google Scholar
. 1999. Gender: New light on an old category. An Introduction. In Gender in Grammar and Cognition, Barbara Unterbeck & Matti Rissanen (eds), xv–xlvi. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar