94009007 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code TSL 98 Hb 15 9789027206794 06 10.1075/tsl.98 13 2011013953 00 BB 01 245 mm 02 164 mm 08 805 gr 10 01 JB code TSL 02 0167-7373 02 98.00 01 02 Typological Studies in Language Typological Studies in Language 01 01 Reciprocals and Semantic Typology Reciprocals and Semantic Typology 1 B01 01 JB code 401138665 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/401138665 2 B01 01 JB code 219138666 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/219138666 3 B01 01 JB code 708138667 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/708138667 4 B01 01 JB code 417138668 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/417138668 01 eng 11 358 03 03 viii 03 00 349 03 01 22 401/.43 03 2011 P325 04 Semantics. 04 Typology (Linguistics) 10 LAN009000 12 CFG 24 JB code LIN.SEMAN Semantics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.TYP Typology 01 06 02 00 Is there a single, Platonic 'reciprocal' meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? This title develops and explains techniques for tackling this question. It confronts a general problem facing semantic typology. 03 00 Reciprocals are an increasingly hot topic in linguistic research. This reflects the intersection of several factors: the semantic and syntactic complexity of reciprocal constructions, their centrality to some key points of linguistic theorizing (such as Binding Conditions on anaphors within Government and Binding Theory), and the centrality of reciprocity to theories of social structure, human evolution and social cognition. No existing work, however, tackles the question of exactly what reciprocal constructions mean cross-linguistically. Is there a single, Platonic ‘reciprocal’ meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? That is the central goal of this volume, and it develops and explains new techniques for tackling this question. At the same time, it confronts a more general problem facing semantic typology: how to investigate a category cross-linguistically without pre-loading the definition of the phenomenon on the basis of what is found in more familiar languages. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/tsl.98.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027206794.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027206794.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/tsl.98.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/tsl.98.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 JB code tsl.98.00ack 06 10.1075/tsl.98.00ack vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments 01 eng 01 01 JB code tsl.98.01intro 06 10.1075/tsl.98.01intro 1 28 28 Article 2 01 04 1. Introduction 1. Introduction 01 04 Reciprocals and semantic typology Reciprocals and semantic typology 1 A01 01 JB code 497147076 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/497147076 2 A01 01 JB code 715147077 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/715147077 3 A01 01 JB code 797147078 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby Monash University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/797147078 4 A01 01 JB code 782147079 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/782147079 01 eng 03 00

Reciprocity lies at the heart of social cognition, and with it so does the encoding of reciprocity in language via reciprocal constructions. Despite the prominence of strong universal claims about the semantics of reciprocal constructions, there is considerable descriptive literature on the semantics of reciprocals that seems to indicate variable coding and subtle cross-linguistic differences in meaning of reciprocals, both of which would make it impossible to formulate a single, essentialising definition of reciprocal semantics. These problems make it vital for studies in the semantic typology of reciprocals to employ methodologies that allow the relevant categories to emerge objectively from cross-linguistic comparison of standardised stimulus materials. We situate the rationale for the 20-language study that forms the basis for this book within this empirical approach to semantic typology, and summarise some of the findings.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.02maj 06 10.1075/tsl.98.02maj 29 60 32 Article 3 01 04 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 01 04 An extensional approach An extensional approach 1 A01 01 JB code 290147080 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/290147080 2 A01 01 JB code 588147081 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/588147081 3 A01 01 JB code 650147082 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/650147082 4 A01 01 JB code 916147083 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/916147083 01 eng 03 00

How similar are reciprocal constructions in the semantic parameters they encode? We investigate this question by using an extensional approach, which examines similarity of meaning by examining how constructions are applied over a set of 64 videoclips depicting reciprocal events (Evans et al. 2004). We apply statistical modelling to descriptions from speakers of 20 languages elicited using the videoclips. We show that there are substantial differences in meaning between constructions of different languages.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.03rap 06 10.1075/tsl.98.03rap 61 74 14 Article 4 01 04 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 1 A01 01 JB code 290147084 Christian J. Rapold Rapold, Christian J. Christian J. Rapold 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/290147084 01 eng 03 00

This paper identifies four reciprocal construction types in Khoekhoe (Central Khoisan). After a brief description of the morphosyntax of each construction, semantic factors governing their choice are explored. Besides lexical semantics, the number of participants, timing of symmetric subevents, and symmetric conceptualisation are shown to account for the distribution of the four partially competing reciprocal constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.04hur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.04hur 75 90 16 Article 5 01 04 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 01 04 Each other and beyond Each other and beyond 1 A01 01 JB code 782147085 Peter Hurst Hurst, Peter Peter Hurst The University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/782147085 2 A01 01 JB code 128147086 Rachel Nordlinger Nordlinger, Rachel Rachel Nordlinger The University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/128147086 01 eng 03 00

In this paper we investigate the constructions that are used to encode reciprocal situations in English, based on responses to the 64 reciprocals videoclips developed for the Reciprocals Across Languages project (Evans et al. 2004). This work complements the extensive body of previous research on English reciprocals by focusing on spoken data. While our data supports the traditional view of each other as the primary and most common reciprocal construction in English, we find a greater degree of variation in construction types than this traditional view might suggest. Furthermore, we show that each other does not have the same degree of acceptability with all reciprocal situation types.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.05zes 06 10.1075/tsl.98.05zes 91 114 24 Article 6 01 04 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 1 A01 01 JB code 440147087 Ulrike Zeshan Zeshan, Ulrike Ulrike Zeshan University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/440147087 2 A01 01 JB code 730147088 Sibaji Panda Panda, Sibaji Sibaji Panda University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/730147088 01 eng 03 00

Indo-Pakistani Sign Language (IPSL) is the sign language used by deaf communities in a large region across India and Pakistan. This visual-gestural language has a dedicated construction for specifically expressing reciprocal relationships, which can be applied to agreement verbs and to auxiliaries. The reciprocal construction relies on a change in the movement pattern of the signs it applies to. In addition, IPSL has a number of other strategies which can have a reciprocal interpretation, and the IPSL lexicon includes a good number of inherently reciprocal signs. All reciprocal expressions can be modified in complex ways that rely on the grammatical use of the sign space. Considering grammaticalisation and lexicalisation processes linking some of these constructions is also important for a better understanding of reciprocity in IPSL.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.06eva 06 10.1075/tsl.98.06eva 115 128 14 Article 7 01 04 6. Mundari reciprocals 6. Mundari reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 15147089 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/15147089 2 A01 01 JB code 333147090 Toshiki Osada Osada, Toshiki Toshiki Osada Research Institute for Humanity and Nature Kyoto, Japan 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/333147090 01 eng 03 00

This paper investigates the semantics of reciprocal constructions in Mundari, an Austro-Asiatic language of northern India. Two grammatical constructions express reciprocity: a basic construction, which infixes <pV> to verb roots, and a serialised construction adding -idi ‘take’ to the basic reciprocal. The reciprocal construction is limited to subject-object coreference and cannot be fed by affixal derivational processes like applicatives or causatives, though it can be fed by zero conversion from other word classes; it may itself feed the causative. From a semantic perspective, the most unusual feature of Mundari reciprocals is the existence of a specialised construction for expressing sequential chaining situations, namely the serialised construction with -idi ‘take’; the basic reciprocal construction is not acceptable for sequential chaining situations.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.07enf 06 10.1075/tsl.98.07enf 129 148 20 Article 8 01 04 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 1 A01 01 JB code 650147091 N.J. Enfield Enfield, N.J. N.J. Enfield 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/650147091 01 eng 03 00

This article describes the grammatical resources available to speakers of Lao for describing situations that can be described broadly as ‘reciprocal’. The analysis is based on complementary methods: elicitation by means of non-linguistic stimuli, exploratory consultation with native speakers, and investigation of corpora of spontaneous language use. Typically, reciprocal situations are described using a semantically general ‘collaborative’ marker on an action verb. The resultant meaning is that some set of people participate in a situation ‘together’, broadly construed. The collaborative marker is found in two distinct syntactic constructions, which differ in terms of their information structural contexts of use. The paper first explores in detail the semantic range of the collaborative marker as it occurs in the more common ‘Type 1’ construction, and then discusses a special pragmatic context for the ‘Type 2’ construction. There is some methodological discussion concerning the results of elicitation via video stimuli. The chapter also discusses two specialised constructions dedicated to the expression of strict reciprocity.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.08kru 06 10.1075/tsl.98.08kru 149 162 14 Article 9 01 04 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 1 A01 01 JB code 255147092 Nicole Kruspe Kruspe, Nicole Nicole Kruspe 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/255147092 01 eng 03 00

This paper provides an account of reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri, an Aslian (Austroasiatic) language spoken in peninsular Malaysia. A brief outline of the relevant grammatical points is provided before turning to examine the two constructions identified. The ‘bare conjunct’ construction centres on a small class of ‘naturally reciprocal’ verbs where the participants are encoded as a single NP. The typologically unique ‘double distributive’ construction is used with all other semantically appropriate verbs and encodes the two participants separately, but with the same form. It emerges that in Mah Meri reciprocal constructions are only used for situations of strict reciprocity where the event is symmetrical, constant, and saturated

01 01 JB code tsl.98.09bur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.09bur 163 176 14 Article 10 01 04 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 1 A01 01 JB code 524147093 Niclas Burenhult Burenhult, Niclas Niclas Burenhult 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/524147093 01 eng 03 00

This work explores the linguistic encoding of reciprocal events in Jahai (Aslian, Mon-Khmer, Malay Peninsula) on the basis of linguistic descriptions of the video stimuli of the ‘Reciprocal constructions and situation type’ task (Evans et al. 2004). Reciprocal situation types find expression in three different constructions: distributive verb forms, reciprocal verb forms, and adjunct phrases containing a body part noun. Distributives represent the dominant strategy, reciprocal forms and body part adjuncts being highly restricted across event types and consultants. The distributive and reciprocal morphemes manifest intricate morphological processes typical of Aslian languages. The paper also addresses some analytical problems raised by the data, such as structural ambiguity and restrictions on derivation, as well as individual variation.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.10lev 06 10.1075/tsl.98.10lev 177 194 18 Article 11 01 04 10. Reciprocals in Yeli Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 10. Reciprocals in Yélî Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 1 A01 01 JB code 206147094 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/206147094 01 eng 03 00

Yélî Dnye has two discernable dedicated constructions for reciprocal marking. The first and main construction uses a dedicated reciprocal pronoun numo, somewhat like English each other. We can recognise two subconstructions. First, the ‘numo-construction’, where the reciprocal pronoun is a patient of the verb, and where the invariant pronoun numo is obligatorily incorporated, triggering intransitivisation (e.g. A-NPs become absolutive). This subconstruction has complexities, for example in the punctual aspect only, the verb is inflected like a transitive, but with enclitics mismatching actual person/number. In the second variant or subconstruction, the ‘noko-construction’, the same reciprocal pronoun (sometimes case-marked as noko) occurs but now in oblique positions with either transitive or intransitive verbs. The reciprocal element here has some peculiar binding properties. Finally, the second independent construction is a dedicated periphrastic (or woni…woni) construction, glossing ‘the one did X to the other, and the other did X to the one’. It is one of the rare cross-serial dependencies that show that natural languages cannot be modelled by context-free phrase-structure grammars. Finally, the usage of these two distinct constructions is discussed.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.11rob 06 10.1075/tsl.98.11rob 195 211 17 Article 12 01 04 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 1 A01 01 JB code 524147095 Stuart Robinson Robinson, Stuart Stuart Robinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/524147095 01 eng 03 00

This paper describes the syntax and semantics of reciprocity in the Central dialect of Rotokas, a non-Austronesian (Papuan) language spoken in Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. In Central Rotokas, there are three main reciprocal construction types, which differ formally according to where the reflexive/reciprocal marker (ora-) occurs in the clause: on the verb, on a pronominal argument or adjunct, or on a body part noun. The choice of construction type is determined by two considerations: the valency of the verb (i.e., whether it has one or two core arguments) and whether the reciprocal action is performed on a body part. The construction types are compatible with a wide range of the logical subtypes of reciprocity (strong, melee, chaining, etc.).

01 01 JB code tsl.98.12weg 06 10.1075/tsl.98.12weg 213 224 12 Article 13 01 04 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 1 A01 01 JB code 128147096 Claudia Wegener Wegener, Claudia Claudia Wegener 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/128147096 01 eng 03 00

This paper describes how reciprocity is expressed in the Papuan (i.e. non-Austronesian­) language Savosavo, spoken in the Solomon Islands. The main strategy is to use the reciprocal nominal mapamapa, which can occur in different NP positions and always triggers default third person singular masculine agreement, regardless of the number and gender of the referents. After a description of this as well as another strategy that is occasionally used (the ‘joint activity construction’), the paper will provide a detailed analysis of data elicited with set of video stimuli and show that the main strategy is used to describe even clearly asymmetric situations, as long as more than one person acts on more than one person in a joint activity.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.13sen 06 10.1075/tsl.98.13sen 225 232 8 Article 14 01 04 13. To have and have not 13. To have and have not 01 04 Kilivila reciprocals Kilivila reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 440147097 Gunter Senft Senft, Gunter Gunter Senft 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/440147097 01 eng 03 00

Kilivila is one of the languages of the world that lacks dedicated reciprocal forms. After a short introduction the paper briefly shows how reciprocity is either not expressed at all, is only implicated in an utterance, or expressed periphrastically.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.14sin 06 10.1075/tsl.98.14sin 233 250 18 Article 15 01 04 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 1 A01 01 JB code 583147098 Ruth Singer Singer, Ruth Ruth Singer 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/583147098 01 eng 03 00

This chapter provides the first detailed description of the form and use of the three strategies for expressing reciprocity in Mawng, a non-Pama Nyungan language of the Iwaidjan language family (Australia). The only productive strategy is the reciprocal complex construction which has transparently developed from a biclausal reciprocal construction. Other strategies for encoding reciprocity include the use of a highly restricted verbal suffix ‑njili and the use of naturally reciprocal predicates in the unmarked “bare reciprocal construction”. Since there is only one productive way to form reciprocals in Mawng, choice of strategy is not determined by the semantics of an event but is structurally constrained by the constructional combinatorics of the predicate most appropriate to the event.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.15gab 06 10.1075/tsl.98.15gab 251 264 14 Article 16 01 04 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 1 A01 01 JB code 75147099 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/75147099 01 eng 03 00

Kuuk Thaayorre has a single dedicated reciprocal marker, the verbal suffix -rr. There are, however, a number of alternative strategies for encoding semantically reciprocal events. This chapter outlines the five constructions that may overtly signal reciprocity in an event and explores which features of reciprocal events motivate the choice between these alternative encoding strategies. It also emphasises the role of non-reciprocal clauses as a valid means of encoding reciprocal event types. I propose that event typicality is a critical factor in determining whether speakers employ a reciprocal or non-reciprocal construction in describing these events. Where the event described approaches the prototype for the verb in question, overt reciprocal coding is usually omitted. Where the event described is atypical of the events usually described by that verb, overt reciprocal coding is strongly preferred.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.16zav 06 10.1075/tsl.98.16zav 265 276 12 Article 17 01 04 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 1 A01 01 JB code 392147100 Roberto Zavala Maldonado Maldonado, Roberto Zavala Roberto Zavala Maldonado 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/392147100 01 eng 03 00

Olutec exhibits three reciprocal strategies each of which convey different levels of prominence of the second reciprocant. In the conjoined subject strategy/, both reciprocants share the same topical status. In the /subject cum adjunct strategy/ the second reciprocant is treated as background information; while in the /subject and object strategy/, the second reciprocant shares the same degree of prominence with the regular primary object. The existence of these three strategies within a language indicates that the pragmatic status of the reciprocants is a key factor to be considered in the cross-linguistic study of reciprocal constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.17dic 06 10.1075/tsl.98.17dic 277 314 38 Article 18 01 04 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 1 A01 01 JB code 142147101 Connie Dickinson Dickinson, Connie Connie Dickinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/142147101 01 eng 03 00

Tsafiki reciprocal constructions have fairly unique characteristics due to the nature of the constructions from which they arise and the overall grammatical structure of Tsafiki. Reciprocals are coded by elements that are already grammaticalised for other functions. Symmetrical positional reciprocal constructions consist of a subset of positionals that inherently code reciprocity. There are two basic types of active reciprocal constructions. The semantic distinction between the two concerns mirative notions such as the degree to which the event concurs with the speaker’s expectations and general knowledge. The function of each reciprocal element is explored by examining its role in other constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.18epp 06 10.1075/tsl.98.18epp 315 328 14 Article 19 01 04 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 1 A01 01 JB code 688147102 Patience Epps Epps, Patience Patience Epps 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/688147102 01 eng 03 00

This paper provides a comprehensive description of the encoding of reciprocal relations in Hup, a language of the Nadahup or ‘Makú’ family of northwest Amazonia. Hup has three morphological strategies for expressing reciprocal relations, but only one of these – the verbal preform ũh – is fully productive. The semantic range of this primary strategy extends well beyond canonical reciprocal interaction to include chains, melêes, and even ‘converse’ events, in which one participant acts non-reciprocally on another; the ‘interactional’ gram ũh is accordingly argued to have a unitary, underspecified semantics relating to interaction between two or more mutually involved co-participants. Hup’s secondary strategies include a marginal reciprocal extension of the reflexive preform hup, and the non-productive use of the preform bab’, restricted to a few lexical items. Typologically intriguing aspects of Hup’s strategies for marking reciprocal relations include the variable use of ũh and hup as prefixes or preverbal particles, the wide semantic range of ũh, and the apparent historical source of both ũh and bab’ in kin terms meaning ‘sibling’.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.19kon 06 10.1075/tsl.98.19kon 329 340 12 Article 20 01 04 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 01 04 Some concluding remarks Some concluding remarks 1 A01 01 JB code 190147103 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/190147103 01 eng 03 00

In the concluding remarks that follow the results of the preceding articles are examined and discussed in the light of concepts of reciprocity distinguished in linguistics and other disciplines. It is shown that these contributions enlarge the empirical basis for the study of reciprocity and contribute to strengthening earlier cross-linguistic generalizations. They also call some of these generalisations into question, however, thus raising interesting new questions and problems for any attempt to map out the space of variation in the relevant domain.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.20add 06 10.1075/tsl.98.20add 341 342 2 Miscellaneous 21 01 04 Addresses Addresses 01 eng 01 01 JB code tsl.98.21ind 06 10.1075/tsl.98.21ind 343 349 7 Miscellaneous 22 01 04 Index Index 01 eng
01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.98 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20110818 C 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company D 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company 02 WORLD WORLD US CA MX 09 01 JB 1 John Benjamins Publishing Company +31 20 6304747 +31 20 6739773 bookorder@benjamins.nl 01 https://benjamins.com 21 16 16 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 99.00 EUR 02 00 Unqualified price 02 83.00 01 Z 0 GBP GB US CA MX 01 01 JB 2 John Benjamins Publishing Company +1 800 562-5666 +1 703 661-1501 benjamins@presswarehouse.com 01 https://benjamins.com 21 16 16 01 00 Unqualified price 02 JB 1 02 149.00 USD
822014648 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code TSL 98 GE 15 9789027286628 06 10.1075/tsl.98 00 EA E133 10 01 JB code TSL 02 JB code 0167-7373 02 98.00 01 02 Typological Studies in Language Typological Studies in Language 01 01 Reciprocals and Semantic Typology Reciprocals and Semantic Typology 1 B01 01 JB code 401138665 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 2 B01 01 JB code 219138666 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 3 B01 01 JB code 708138667 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 4 B01 01 JB code 417138668 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 01 eng 11 358 03 03 viii 03 00 349 03 24 JB code LIN.SEMAN Semantics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.TYP Typology 10 LAN009000 12 CFG 01 06 02 00 Is there a single, Platonic 'reciprocal' meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? This title develops and explains techniques for tackling this question. It confronts a general problem facing semantic typology. 03 00 Reciprocals are an increasingly hot topic in linguistic research. This reflects the intersection of several factors: the semantic and syntactic complexity of reciprocal constructions, their centrality to some key points of linguistic theorizing (such as Binding Conditions on anaphors within Government and Binding Theory), and the centrality of reciprocity to theories of social structure, human evolution and social cognition. No existing work, however, tackles the question of exactly what reciprocal constructions mean cross-linguistically. Is there a single, Platonic ‘reciprocal’ meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? That is the central goal of this volume, and it develops and explains new techniques for tackling this question. At the same time, it confronts a more general problem facing semantic typology: how to investigate a category cross-linguistically without pre-loading the definition of the phenomenon on the basis of what is found in more familiar languages. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/tsl.98.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027206794.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027206794.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/tsl.98.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/tsl.98.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 JB code tsl.98.00ack 06 10.1075/tsl.98.00ack vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments 01 01 JB code tsl.98.01intro 06 10.1075/tsl.98.01intro 1 28 28 Article 2 01 04 1. Introduction 1. Introduction 01 04 Reciprocals and semantic typology Reciprocals and semantic typology 1 A01 01 JB code 497147076 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 2 A01 01 JB code 715147077 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 3 A01 01 JB code 797147078 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby Monash University 4 A01 01 JB code 782147079 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 01 01 JB code tsl.98.02maj 06 10.1075/tsl.98.02maj 29 60 32 Article 3 01 04 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 01 04 An extensional approach An extensional approach 1 A01 01 JB code 290147080 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 2 A01 01 JB code 588147081 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 3 A01 01 JB code 650147082 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 4 A01 01 JB code 916147083 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 01 01 JB code tsl.98.03rap 06 10.1075/tsl.98.03rap 61 74 14 Article 4 01 04 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 1 A01 01 JB code 290147084 Christian J. Rapold Rapold, Christian J. Christian J. Rapold 01 01 JB code tsl.98.04hur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.04hur 75 90 16 Article 5 01 04 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 01 04 Each other and beyond Each other and beyond 1 A01 01 JB code 782147085 Peter Hurst Hurst, Peter Peter Hurst The University of Melbourne 2 A01 01 JB code 128147086 Rachel Nordlinger Nordlinger, Rachel Rachel Nordlinger The University of Melbourne 01 01 JB code tsl.98.05zes 06 10.1075/tsl.98.05zes 91 114 24 Article 6 01 04 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 1 A01 01 JB code 440147087 Ulrike Zeshan Zeshan, Ulrike Ulrike Zeshan University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 2 A01 01 JB code 730147088 Sibaji Panda Panda, Sibaji Sibaji Panda University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 01 01 JB code tsl.98.06eva 06 10.1075/tsl.98.06eva 115 128 14 Article 7 01 04 6. Mundari reciprocals 6. Mundari reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 15147089 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 2 A01 01 JB code 333147090 Toshiki Osada Osada, Toshiki Toshiki Osada Research Institute for Humanity and Nature Kyoto, Japan 01 01 JB code tsl.98.07enf 06 10.1075/tsl.98.07enf 129 148 20 Article 8 01 04 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 1 A01 01 JB code 650147091 N.J. Enfield Enfield, N.J. N.J. Enfield 01 01 JB code tsl.98.08kru 06 10.1075/tsl.98.08kru 149 162 14 Article 9 01 04 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 1 A01 01 JB code 255147092 Nicole Kruspe Kruspe, Nicole Nicole Kruspe 01 01 JB code tsl.98.09bur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.09bur 163 176 14 Article 10 01 04 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 1 A01 01 JB code 524147093 Niclas Burenhult Burenhult, Niclas Niclas Burenhult 01 01 JB code tsl.98.10lev 06 10.1075/tsl.98.10lev 177 194 18 Article 11 01 04 10. Reciprocals in Yeli Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 10. Reciprocals in Yélî Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 1 A01 01 JB code 206147094 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson 01 01 JB code tsl.98.11rob 06 10.1075/tsl.98.11rob 195 211 17 Article 12 01 04 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 1 A01 01 JB code 524147095 Stuart Robinson Robinson, Stuart Stuart Robinson 01 01 JB code tsl.98.12weg 06 10.1075/tsl.98.12weg 213 224 12 Article 13 01 04 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 1 A01 01 JB code 128147096 Claudia Wegener Wegener, Claudia Claudia Wegener 01 01 JB code tsl.98.13sen 06 10.1075/tsl.98.13sen 225 232 8 Article 14 01 04 13. To have and have not 13. To have and have not 01 04 Kilivila reciprocals Kilivila reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 440147097 Gunter Senft Senft, Gunter Gunter Senft 01 01 JB code tsl.98.14sin 06 10.1075/tsl.98.14sin 233 250 18 Article 15 01 04 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 1 A01 01 JB code 583147098 Ruth Singer Singer, Ruth Ruth Singer 01 01 JB code tsl.98.15gab 06 10.1075/tsl.98.15gab 251 264 14 Article 16 01 04 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 1 A01 01 JB code 75147099 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby 01 01 JB code tsl.98.16zav 06 10.1075/tsl.98.16zav 265 276 12 Article 17 01 04 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 1 A01 01 JB code 392147100 Roberto Zavala Maldonado Maldonado, Roberto Zavala Roberto Zavala Maldonado 01 01 JB code tsl.98.17dic 06 10.1075/tsl.98.17dic 277 314 38 Article 18 01 04 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 1 A01 01 JB code 142147101 Connie Dickinson Dickinson, Connie Connie Dickinson 01 01 JB code tsl.98.18epp 06 10.1075/tsl.98.18epp 315 328 14 Article 19 01 04 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 1 A01 01 JB code 688147102 Patience Epps Epps, Patience Patience Epps 01 01 JB code tsl.98.19kon 06 10.1075/tsl.98.19kon 329 340 12 Article 20 01 04 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 01 04 Some concluding remarks Some concluding remarks 1 A01 01 JB code 190147103 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König 01 01 JB code tsl.98.20add 06 10.1075/tsl.98.20add 341 342 2 Miscellaneous 21 01 04 Addresses Addresses 01 01 JB code tsl.98.21ind 06 10.1075/tsl.98.21ind 343 349 7 Miscellaneous 22 01 04 Index Index 01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20110818 C 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company D 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027206794 WORLD 03 01 JB 17 Google 03 https://play.google.com/store/books 21 01 00 Unqualified price 00 99.00 EUR 01 00 Unqualified price 00 83.00 GBP 01 00 Unqualified price 00 149.00 USD 889009008 03 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 JB code TSL 98 Eb 15 9789027286628 06 10.1075/tsl.98 00 EA E107 10 01 JB code TSL 02 0167-7373 02 98.00 01 02 Typological Studies in Language Typological Studies in Language 11 01 JB code jbe-all 01 02 Full EBA collection (ca. 4,200 titles) 11 01 JB code jbe-2015-all 01 02 Complete backlist (3,208 titles, 1967–2015) 05 02 Complete backlist (1967–2015) 11 01 JB code jbe-2015-linguistics 01 02 Subject collection: Linguistics (2,773 titles, 1967–2015) 05 02 Linguistics (1967–2015) 11 01 JB code jbe-2015-tsl 01 02 Typological Studies in Language (vols. 1–110, 1982–2015) 05 02 TSL (vols. 1–110, 1982–2015) 01 01 Reciprocals and Semantic Typology Reciprocals and Semantic Typology 1 B01 01 JB code 401138665 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/401138665 2 B01 01 JB code 219138666 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/219138666 3 B01 01 JB code 708138667 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/708138667 4 B01 01 JB code 417138668 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/417138668 01 eng 11 358 03 03 viii 03 00 349 03 01 22 401/.43 03 2011 P325 04 Semantics. 04 Typology (Linguistics) 10 LAN009000 12 CFG 24 JB code LIN.SEMAN Semantics 24 JB code LIN.THEOR Theoretical linguistics 24 JB code LIN.TYP Typology 01 06 02 00 Is there a single, Platonic 'reciprocal' meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? This title develops and explains techniques for tackling this question. It confronts a general problem facing semantic typology. 03 00 Reciprocals are an increasingly hot topic in linguistic research. This reflects the intersection of several factors: the semantic and syntactic complexity of reciprocal constructions, their centrality to some key points of linguistic theorizing (such as Binding Conditions on anaphors within Government and Binding Theory), and the centrality of reciprocity to theories of social structure, human evolution and social cognition. No existing work, however, tackles the question of exactly what reciprocal constructions mean cross-linguistically. Is there a single, Platonic ‘reciprocal’ meaning found in all languages, or is there a cluster of related concepts which are nonetheless impossible to characterize in any single way? That is the central goal of this volume, and it develops and explains new techniques for tackling this question. At the same time, it confronts a more general problem facing semantic typology: how to investigate a category cross-linguistically without pre-loading the definition of the phenomenon on the basis of what is found in more familiar languages. 01 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/475/tsl.98.png 01 01 D502 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_jpg/9789027206794.jpg 01 01 D504 https://benjamins.com/covers/475_tif/9789027206794.tif 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_front/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/125/tsl.98.png 02 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/1200_back/tsl.98.hb.png 03 00 03 01 01 D503 https://benjamins.com/covers/3d_web/tsl.98.hb.png 01 01 JB code tsl.98.00ack 06 10.1075/tsl.98.00ack vii viii 2 Miscellaneous 1 01 04 Acknowledgments Acknowledgments 01 eng 01 01 JB code tsl.98.01intro 06 10.1075/tsl.98.01intro 1 28 28 Article 2 01 04 1. Introduction 1. Introduction 01 04 Reciprocals and semantic typology Reciprocals and semantic typology 1 A01 01 JB code 497147076 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/497147076 2 A01 01 JB code 715147077 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/715147077 3 A01 01 JB code 797147078 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby Monash University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/797147078 4 A01 01 JB code 782147079 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/782147079 01 eng 03 00

Reciprocity lies at the heart of social cognition, and with it so does the encoding of reciprocity in language via reciprocal constructions. Despite the prominence of strong universal claims about the semantics of reciprocal constructions, there is considerable descriptive literature on the semantics of reciprocals that seems to indicate variable coding and subtle cross-linguistic differences in meaning of reciprocals, both of which would make it impossible to formulate a single, essentialising definition of reciprocal semantics. These problems make it vital for studies in the semantic typology of reciprocals to employ methodologies that allow the relevant categories to emerge objectively from cross-linguistic comparison of standardised stimulus materials. We situate the rationale for the 20-language study that forms the basis for this book within this empirical approach to semantic typology, and summarise some of the findings.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.02maj 06 10.1075/tsl.98.02maj 29 60 32 Article 3 01 04 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 2. The semantics of reciprocal constructions across languages 01 04 An extensional approach An extensional approach 1 A01 01 JB code 290147080 Asifa Majid Majid, Asifa Asifa Majid Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/290147080 2 A01 01 JB code 588147081 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/588147081 3 A01 01 JB code 650147082 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby University of California at Berkeley 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/650147082 4 A01 01 JB code 916147083 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/916147083 01 eng 03 00

How similar are reciprocal constructions in the semantic parameters they encode? We investigate this question by using an extensional approach, which examines similarity of meaning by examining how constructions are applied over a set of 64 videoclips depicting reciprocal events (Evans et al. 2004). We apply statistical modelling to descriptions from speakers of 20 languages elicited using the videoclips. We show that there are substantial differences in meaning between constructions of different languages.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.03rap 06 10.1075/tsl.98.03rap 61 74 14 Article 4 01 04 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 3. Semantics of Khoekhoe reciprocal constructions 1 A01 01 JB code 290147084 Christian J. Rapold Rapold, Christian J. Christian J. Rapold 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/290147084 01 eng 03 00

This paper identifies four reciprocal construction types in Khoekhoe (Central Khoisan). After a brief description of the morphosyntax of each construction, semantic factors governing their choice are explored. Besides lexical semantics, the number of participants, timing of symmetric subevents, and symmetric conceptualisation are shown to account for the distribution of the four partially competing reciprocal constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.04hur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.04hur 75 90 16 Article 5 01 04 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 4. Reciprocal constructions in English 01 04 Each other and beyond Each other and beyond 1 A01 01 JB code 782147085 Peter Hurst Hurst, Peter Peter Hurst The University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/782147085 2 A01 01 JB code 128147086 Rachel Nordlinger Nordlinger, Rachel Rachel Nordlinger The University of Melbourne 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/128147086 01 eng 03 00

In this paper we investigate the constructions that are used to encode reciprocal situations in English, based on responses to the 64 reciprocals videoclips developed for the Reciprocals Across Languages project (Evans et al. 2004). This work complements the extensive body of previous research on English reciprocals by focusing on spoken data. While our data supports the traditional view of each other as the primary and most common reciprocal construction in English, we find a greater degree of variation in construction types than this traditional view might suggest. Furthermore, we show that each other does not have the same degree of acceptability with all reciprocal situation types.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.05zes 06 10.1075/tsl.98.05zes 91 114 24 Article 6 01 04 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 5. Reciprocal constructions in Indo-Pakistani Sign Language 1 A01 01 JB code 440147087 Ulrike Zeshan Zeshan, Ulrike Ulrike Zeshan University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/440147087 2 A01 01 JB code 730147088 Sibaji Panda Panda, Sibaji Sibaji Panda University of Central Lancashire, Preston UK & Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/730147088 01 eng 03 00

Indo-Pakistani Sign Language (IPSL) is the sign language used by deaf communities in a large region across India and Pakistan. This visual-gestural language has a dedicated construction for specifically expressing reciprocal relationships, which can be applied to agreement verbs and to auxiliaries. The reciprocal construction relies on a change in the movement pattern of the signs it applies to. In addition, IPSL has a number of other strategies which can have a reciprocal interpretation, and the IPSL lexicon includes a good number of inherently reciprocal signs. All reciprocal expressions can be modified in complex ways that rely on the grammatical use of the sign space. Considering grammaticalisation and lexicalisation processes linking some of these constructions is also important for a better understanding of reciprocity in IPSL.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.06eva 06 10.1075/tsl.98.06eva 115 128 14 Article 7 01 04 6. Mundari reciprocals 6. Mundari reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 15147089 Nicholas Evans Evans, Nicholas Nicholas Evans Australian National University 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/15147089 2 A01 01 JB code 333147090 Toshiki Osada Osada, Toshiki Toshiki Osada Research Institute for Humanity and Nature Kyoto, Japan 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/333147090 01 eng 03 00

This paper investigates the semantics of reciprocal constructions in Mundari, an Austro-Asiatic language of northern India. Two grammatical constructions express reciprocity: a basic construction, which infixes <pV> to verb roots, and a serialised construction adding -idi ‘take’ to the basic reciprocal. The reciprocal construction is limited to subject-object coreference and cannot be fed by affixal derivational processes like applicatives or causatives, though it can be fed by zero conversion from other word classes; it may itself feed the causative. From a semantic perspective, the most unusual feature of Mundari reciprocals is the existence of a specialised construction for expressing sequential chaining situations, namely the serialised construction with -idi ‘take’; the basic reciprocal construction is not acceptable for sequential chaining situations.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.07enf 06 10.1075/tsl.98.07enf 129 148 20 Article 8 01 04 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 7. Description of reciprocal situations in Lao 1 A01 01 JB code 650147091 N.J. Enfield Enfield, N.J. N.J. Enfield 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/650147091 01 eng 03 00

This article describes the grammatical resources available to speakers of Lao for describing situations that can be described broadly as ‘reciprocal’. The analysis is based on complementary methods: elicitation by means of non-linguistic stimuli, exploratory consultation with native speakers, and investigation of corpora of spontaneous language use. Typically, reciprocal situations are described using a semantically general ‘collaborative’ marker on an action verb. The resultant meaning is that some set of people participate in a situation ‘together’, broadly construed. The collaborative marker is found in two distinct syntactic constructions, which differ in terms of their information structural contexts of use. The paper first explores in detail the semantic range of the collaborative marker as it occurs in the more common ‘Type 1’ construction, and then discusses a special pragmatic context for the ‘Type 2’ construction. There is some methodological discussion concerning the results of elicitation via video stimuli. The chapter also discusses two specialised constructions dedicated to the expression of strict reciprocity.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.08kru 06 10.1075/tsl.98.08kru 149 162 14 Article 9 01 04 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 8. Reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri 1 A01 01 JB code 255147092 Nicole Kruspe Kruspe, Nicole Nicole Kruspe 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/255147092 01 eng 03 00

This paper provides an account of reciprocal constructions in Mah Meri, an Aslian (Austroasiatic) language spoken in peninsular Malaysia. A brief outline of the relevant grammatical points is provided before turning to examine the two constructions identified. The ‘bare conjunct’ construction centres on a small class of ‘naturally reciprocal’ verbs where the participants are encoded as a single NP. The typologically unique ‘double distributive’ construction is used with all other semantically appropriate verbs and encodes the two participants separately, but with the same form. It emerges that in Mah Meri reciprocal constructions are only used for situations of strict reciprocity where the event is symmetrical, constant, and saturated

01 01 JB code tsl.98.09bur 06 10.1075/tsl.98.09bur 163 176 14 Article 10 01 04 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 9. The coding of reciprocal events in Jahai 1 A01 01 JB code 524147093 Niclas Burenhult Burenhult, Niclas Niclas Burenhult 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/524147093 01 eng 03 00

This work explores the linguistic encoding of reciprocal events in Jahai (Aslian, Mon-Khmer, Malay Peninsula) on the basis of linguistic descriptions of the video stimuli of the ‘Reciprocal constructions and situation type’ task (Evans et al. 2004). Reciprocal situation types find expression in three different constructions: distributive verb forms, reciprocal verb forms, and adjunct phrases containing a body part noun. Distributives represent the dominant strategy, reciprocal forms and body part adjuncts being highly restricted across event types and consultants. The distributive and reciprocal morphemes manifest intricate morphological processes typical of Aslian languages. The paper also addresses some analytical problems raised by the data, such as structural ambiguity and restrictions on derivation, as well as individual variation.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.10lev 06 10.1075/tsl.98.10lev 177 194 18 Article 11 01 04 10. Reciprocals in Yeli Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 10. Reciprocals in Yélî Dnye, the Papuan language of Rossel Island 1 A01 01 JB code 206147094 Stephen C. Levinson Levinson, Stephen C. Stephen C. Levinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/206147094 01 eng 03 00

Yélî Dnye has two discernable dedicated constructions for reciprocal marking. The first and main construction uses a dedicated reciprocal pronoun numo, somewhat like English each other. We can recognise two subconstructions. First, the ‘numo-construction’, where the reciprocal pronoun is a patient of the verb, and where the invariant pronoun numo is obligatorily incorporated, triggering intransitivisation (e.g. A-NPs become absolutive). This subconstruction has complexities, for example in the punctual aspect only, the verb is inflected like a transitive, but with enclitics mismatching actual person/number. In the second variant or subconstruction, the ‘noko-construction’, the same reciprocal pronoun (sometimes case-marked as noko) occurs but now in oblique positions with either transitive or intransitive verbs. The reciprocal element here has some peculiar binding properties. Finally, the second independent construction is a dedicated periphrastic (or woni…woni) construction, glossing ‘the one did X to the other, and the other did X to the one’. It is one of the rare cross-serial dependencies that show that natural languages cannot be modelled by context-free phrase-structure grammars. Finally, the usage of these two distinct constructions is discussed.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.11rob 06 10.1075/tsl.98.11rob 195 211 17 Article 12 01 04 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 11. Reciprocals in Rotokas 1 A01 01 JB code 524147095 Stuart Robinson Robinson, Stuart Stuart Robinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/524147095 01 eng 03 00

This paper describes the syntax and semantics of reciprocity in the Central dialect of Rotokas, a non-Austronesian (Papuan) language spoken in Bougainville, Papua New Guinea. In Central Rotokas, there are three main reciprocal construction types, which differ formally according to where the reflexive/reciprocal marker (ora-) occurs in the clause: on the verb, on a pronominal argument or adjunct, or on a body part noun. The choice of construction type is determined by two considerations: the valency of the verb (i.e., whether it has one or two core arguments) and whether the reciprocal action is performed on a body part. The construction types are compatible with a wide range of the logical subtypes of reciprocity (strong, melee, chaining, etc.).

01 01 JB code tsl.98.12weg 06 10.1075/tsl.98.12weg 213 224 12 Article 13 01 04 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 12. Expression of reciprocity in Savosavo 1 A01 01 JB code 128147096 Claudia Wegener Wegener, Claudia Claudia Wegener 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/128147096 01 eng 03 00

This paper describes how reciprocity is expressed in the Papuan (i.e. non-Austronesian­) language Savosavo, spoken in the Solomon Islands. The main strategy is to use the reciprocal nominal mapamapa, which can occur in different NP positions and always triggers default third person singular masculine agreement, regardless of the number and gender of the referents. After a description of this as well as another strategy that is occasionally used (the ‘joint activity construction’), the paper will provide a detailed analysis of data elicited with set of video stimuli and show that the main strategy is used to describe even clearly asymmetric situations, as long as more than one person acts on more than one person in a joint activity.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.13sen 06 10.1075/tsl.98.13sen 225 232 8 Article 14 01 04 13. To have and have not 13. To have and have not 01 04 Kilivila reciprocals Kilivila reciprocals 1 A01 01 JB code 440147097 Gunter Senft Senft, Gunter Gunter Senft 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/440147097 01 eng 03 00

Kilivila is one of the languages of the world that lacks dedicated reciprocal forms. After a short introduction the paper briefly shows how reciprocity is either not expressed at all, is only implicated in an utterance, or expressed periphrastically.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.14sin 06 10.1075/tsl.98.14sin 233 250 18 Article 15 01 04 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 14. Strategies for encoding reciprocity in Mawng 1 A01 01 JB code 583147098 Ruth Singer Singer, Ruth Ruth Singer 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/583147098 01 eng 03 00

This chapter provides the first detailed description of the form and use of the three strategies for expressing reciprocity in Mawng, a non-Pama Nyungan language of the Iwaidjan language family (Australia). The only productive strategy is the reciprocal complex construction which has transparently developed from a biclausal reciprocal construction. Other strategies for encoding reciprocity include the use of a highly restricted verbal suffix ‑njili and the use of naturally reciprocal predicates in the unmarked “bare reciprocal construction”. Since there is only one productive way to form reciprocals in Mawng, choice of strategy is not determined by the semantics of an event but is structurally constrained by the constructional combinatorics of the predicate most appropriate to the event.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.15gab 06 10.1075/tsl.98.15gab 251 264 14 Article 16 01 04 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 15. Reciprocal-marked and marked reciprocal events in Kuuk Thaayorre 1 A01 01 JB code 75147099 Alice Gaby Gaby, Alice Alice Gaby 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/75147099 01 eng 03 00

Kuuk Thaayorre has a single dedicated reciprocal marker, the verbal suffix -rr. There are, however, a number of alternative strategies for encoding semantically reciprocal events. This chapter outlines the five constructions that may overtly signal reciprocity in an event and explores which features of reciprocal events motivate the choice between these alternative encoding strategies. It also emphasises the role of non-reciprocal clauses as a valid means of encoding reciprocal event types. I propose that event typicality is a critical factor in determining whether speakers employ a reciprocal or non-reciprocal construction in describing these events. Where the event described approaches the prototype for the verb in question, overt reciprocal coding is usually omitted. Where the event described is atypical of the events usually described by that verb, overt reciprocal coding is strongly preferred.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.16zav 06 10.1075/tsl.98.16zav 265 276 12 Article 17 01 04 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 16. Reciprocal constructions in Olutec 1 A01 01 JB code 392147100 Roberto Zavala Maldonado Maldonado, Roberto Zavala Roberto Zavala Maldonado 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/392147100 01 eng 03 00

Olutec exhibits three reciprocal strategies each of which convey different levels of prominence of the second reciprocant. In the conjoined subject strategy/, both reciprocants share the same topical status. In the /subject cum adjunct strategy/ the second reciprocant is treated as background information; while in the /subject and object strategy/, the second reciprocant shares the same degree of prominence with the regular primary object. The existence of these three strategies within a language indicates that the pragmatic status of the reciprocants is a key factor to be considered in the cross-linguistic study of reciprocal constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.17dic 06 10.1075/tsl.98.17dic 277 314 38 Article 18 01 04 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 17. Reciprocal constructions in Tsafiki 1 A01 01 JB code 142147101 Connie Dickinson Dickinson, Connie Connie Dickinson 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/142147101 01 eng 03 00

Tsafiki reciprocal constructions have fairly unique characteristics due to the nature of the constructions from which they arise and the overall grammatical structure of Tsafiki. Reciprocals are coded by elements that are already grammaticalised for other functions. Symmetrical positional reciprocal constructions consist of a subset of positionals that inherently code reciprocity. There are two basic types of active reciprocal constructions. The semantic distinction between the two concerns mirative notions such as the degree to which the event concurs with the speaker’s expectations and general knowledge. The function of each reciprocal element is explored by examining its role in other constructions.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.18epp 06 10.1075/tsl.98.18epp 315 328 14 Article 19 01 04 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 18. Reciprocal constructions in Hup 1 A01 01 JB code 688147102 Patience Epps Epps, Patience Patience Epps 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/688147102 01 eng 03 00

This paper provides a comprehensive description of the encoding of reciprocal relations in Hup, a language of the Nadahup or ‘Makú’ family of northwest Amazonia. Hup has three morphological strategies for expressing reciprocal relations, but only one of these – the verbal preform ũh – is fully productive. The semantic range of this primary strategy extends well beyond canonical reciprocal interaction to include chains, melêes, and even ‘converse’ events, in which one participant acts non-reciprocally on another; the ‘interactional’ gram ũh is accordingly argued to have a unitary, underspecified semantics relating to interaction between two or more mutually involved co-participants. Hup’s secondary strategies include a marginal reciprocal extension of the reflexive preform hup, and the non-productive use of the preform bab’, restricted to a few lexical items. Typologically intriguing aspects of Hup’s strategies for marking reciprocal relations include the variable use of ũh and hup as prefixes or preverbal particles, the wide semantic range of ũh, and the apparent historical source of both ũh and bab’ in kin terms meaning ‘sibling’.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.19kon 06 10.1075/tsl.98.19kon 329 340 12 Article 20 01 04 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 19. Reciprocals and semantic typology 01 04 Some concluding remarks Some concluding remarks 1 A01 01 JB code 190147103 Ekkehard König König, Ekkehard Ekkehard König 07 https://benjamins.com/catalog/persons/190147103 01 eng 03 00

In the concluding remarks that follow the results of the preceding articles are examined and discussed in the light of concepts of reciprocity distinguished in linguistics and other disciplines. It is shown that these contributions enlarge the empirical basis for the study of reciprocity and contribute to strengthening earlier cross-linguistic generalizations. They also call some of these generalisations into question, however, thus raising interesting new questions and problems for any attempt to map out the space of variation in the relevant domain.

01 01 JB code tsl.98.20add 06 10.1075/tsl.98.20add 341 342 2 Miscellaneous 21 01 04 Addresses Addresses 01 eng 01 01 JB code tsl.98.21ind 06 10.1075/tsl.98.21ind 343 349 7 Miscellaneous 22 01 04 Index Index 01 eng
01 JB code JBENJAMINS John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 01 JB code JB John Benjamins Publishing Company 01 https://benjamins.com 02 https://benjamins.com/catalog/tsl.98 Amsterdam NL 00 John Benjamins Publishing Company Marketing Department / Karin Plijnaar, Pieter Lamers onix@benjamins.nl 04 01 00 20110818 C 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company D 2011 John Benjamins Publishing Company 02 WORLD 13 15 9789027206794 WORLD 09 01 JB 3 John Benjamins e-Platform 03 https://jbe-platform.com 29 https://jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027286628 21 01 00 Unqualified price 02 99.00 EUR 01 00 Unqualified price 02 83.00 GBP GB 01 00 Unqualified price 02 149.00 USD