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
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