Volume 44, Issue 4
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This paper contributes to the typology of ditransitive constructions. Akebu (Kwa, Ghana-Togo mountain, West Africa) has four strategies of alignment of ditransitive verbs, if both theme and recipient objects are expressed: a neutral strategy, a possessive-like strategy, a strategy with a pronominal reprise and a ‘take’ serial verb construction strategy. The possessive-like strategy that is most standard in Akebu is rare in a cross-linguistic perspective and has not been attested in other Kwa languages. The factors that license a certain strategy are person, number and noun class of the theme and recipient and the internal structure of the theme noun phrase.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aboh, Enoch Oladé
    1998 Focus constructions and the focus criterion in Gungbe. Linguistique africaine20. 5–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Adjeoda, Dzifa
    2008Eléments de morphosyntaxe du kebu, langue dite résiduelle du Togo. Université de Lomé, maîtrise.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Akrofi Ansah, Mercy
    2010 Focused constituent interrogatives in Lɛtɛ (Larteh). Nordic Journal of African Studies19(2). 98–107.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Amoua, Kwamivi
    2011Le système nominal du kebu. Université de Lomé: maîtrise.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Atoyebi, Joseph , Martin Haspelmath & Andrej Malchukov
    2010 Ditransitive constructions in Yorùbá. In Andrej Malchukov , Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions, 145–165. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110220377.145
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220377.145 [Google Scholar]
  6. Blench, Roger
    2009 Do the Ghana-Togo mountain languages constitute a genetic group?The Journal of West African Languages36(1/2). 19–36.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bobuafor, Mercy
    2013A grammar of Tafi. Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Conti, Carmen
    2008Receptores y beneficiarios: Estudio tipológico de la ditransitividad. München: Lincom Europa.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Creissels, Denis
    1979Les constructions dites “possessives”, étude de linguistique générale et de typologie linguistique. Université Paris4: thèse d’état.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Creissels, Denis & Jérémie Kouadio N’Guessan
    1977Description phonologique et grammaticale d’un parler baoulé. Abidjan: Institut de Linguistique Appliquée.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Creissels, Denis & Jérémie Kouadio
    2010 Ditransitive constructions in Baule. In Andrej Malchukov , Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions, 166–189. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110220377.166
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220377.166 [Google Scholar]
  12. Croft, William
    1985 Indirect object “lowering”. InProceedings of the 11th annual meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society, 39–51. Berkeley: BLS.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Djitovi, Afi
    2003English and Akebu phonologies: A comparative analysis. Université de Lomé: maîtrise.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Dorvlo, Kofi
    2008A grammar of Logba (Ikpana). Utrecht: LOT.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Dryer, Matthew S.
    1986 Primary objects, secondary objects, and antidative. Language62. 808–845. doi:  10.2307/415173
    https://doi.org/10.2307/415173 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2007 Clause types. In Timothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, 2nd ed., vol.2, 224–275. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511619427.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511619427.004 [Google Scholar]
  17. Eberhard, David M. , Gary F. Simons & Charles D. Fennig
    (eds.) 2019Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 22nd ed.Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: www.ethnologue.com
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Essegbey, James
    1999 Inherent complement verbs revisited: towards an understanding of argument structure in Ewe. Leiden University: PhD dissertation.
  19. 2010 Inherent complement verbs and the basic double object construction in Gbe. In Enoch O. Aboh & James Essegbey (eds.), Topics in Kwa syntax, 177–193. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑3189‑1_8
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3189-1_8 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fedotov, Maxim
    2016 Adnominal predicative possessive construction and pragmatically “flexible” noun phrases in Gban. Issledovanija po jazykam Afriki [Studies on African languages] 6. 320–345.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Fiedler, Ines
    1998 Fokus im Aja. In Ines Fiedler , Catherine Griefenow-Mewis & Brigitte Reineke (eds.), Afrikanische Sprachen im Brennpunkt der Forschung, 75–89. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Gblem, Honorine Massanvi
    1995Description systematique de l’igo. Université de GrenobleIII: thèse de doctorat.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Gblem-Poidi, Honorine Massanvi & Laré Kantchoa
    2012Les langues du Togo: État de la recherche et perspectives. Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Harley, Matthew W.
    2009 Focus constructions in Tuwuli. Journal of West African Languages36(1–2). 75–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Haspelmath, Martin
    2005 Argument marking in ditransitive alignment types. Linguistic Discovery3(1). 1–21. 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.280
    https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.280 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2007 Ditransitive alignment splits and inverse alignment. Functions of Language14(1). 79–102. doi:  10.1075/fol.14.1.06has
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.14.1.06has [Google Scholar]
  27. 2015a Transitivity prominence. In Andrej L. Malchukov & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Valency classes in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, vol.1, 131–147. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. 2015b Ditransitive constructions. Annual Review of Linguistics1. 19–41. doi:  10.1146/annurev‑linguist‑030514‑125204
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguist-030514-125204 [Google Scholar]
  29. Heine, Bernd
    1968Die Verbreitung und Gliederung der Togorestsprachen. Köln: Dietrich Reimer Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Heine, Bernd & Christa König
    2010 On the linear order of ditransitive objects. Language Sciences32 (1). 87–131. doi:  10.1016/j.langsci.2008.07.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2008.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hérault, Georges
    1978Éléments de grammaire adioukrou. Université de ParisVII: thèse de doctorat.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kazama, Shinjiro
    2012 Designative case in Tungusic languages. In Andrej L. Malchukov & Lindsay J. Whaley (eds.), Recent advances in Tungusic linguistics, 123–154. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Khanina, Olesya & Andrey Shluinsky
    . A rare type of benefactive construction: Evidence from Enets. Linguistics52(6). 1391–1431. doi: 10.1515/ling‑2014‑0025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2014-0025 [Google Scholar]
  34. Kittilä, Seppo
    2006a Object-, animacy- and role-based strategies: A typology of object marking. Studies in Language30(1). 1–32. doi:  10.1075/sl.30.1.02kit
    https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.30.1.02kit [Google Scholar]
  35. 2006b The anomaly of the verb ‘give’ explained by its high (formal and semantic) transitivity. Linguistics44(3). 569–612. doi:  10.1515/LING.2006.019
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2006.019 [Google Scholar]
  36. Koffi, Yao
    2010Pronouns in Akebu. ERIC Online submission ED510110. files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED510110.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Kouadio N’Guessan, Jérémie
    1996Description systematique de l’attie de Memni, vol.1. Université de GrenobleIII: thèse de doctorat.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Lefebvre, Claire
    1994 New facts from Fongbe on the double object constructions. Lingua94(2–3). 69–123. doi:  10.1016/0024‑3841(94)90022‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(94)90022-1 [Google Scholar]
  39. Lord, Carol
    1982 The development of object markers in serial verb languages. In Paul J. Hopper & Sandra A. Thompson (eds.), Studies in transitivity, 277–300. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368903_016
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368903_016 [Google Scholar]
  40. M’boma, Komlavi Malanbo
    2014Kekpèe kè léh Biblae Kéhnit yè loh otuèlêe yorrot-yorrot yè. Les prémices de la Sainte Bible en akébou. [No place of publication.]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Makeeva, Nadezhda
    2016 Fonotaktika jazyka akebu [Phonotactics of Akebu]. In Ekaterina Devjatkina (eds.), Problemy jazyka, 199–211. Moscow: Institut jazykoznanija RAN.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. 2018 Prilagatel’nye i kvalitativnnye glagoly v jazyke akebu [Adjectives and qualitative verbs in Akebu]. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Asian and African Studies10(1). 14–31. 10.21638/11701/spbu13.2018.102
    https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu13.2018.102 [Google Scholar]
  43. Makeeva, Nadezhda , & Andrey Shluinsky
    2017 Bitranzitivnaja konstrukcija v jazyke akebu [A ditransitive construction in Akebu]. In Ekaterina A. Lyutikova & Anton V. Cimmerling (eds.), Tipologija morfosintaksičeskix parametrov4, 161–176. Moscow: Pushkin State Russian Language Institute.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 2018 Noun classes and class agreement in Akebu. Journal of West African Languages45(1). 1–26.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Malchukov, Andrej
    2018 Typological remarks on “internal” beneficiaries and the benefactive-possessive convergence. In Agnes Korn & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). Ditransitive constructions in a typological perspective, 13–25. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Malchukov, Andrej , Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie
    2010 Ditransitive constructions: A typological overview. In Andrej Malchukov , Martin Haspelmath & Bernard Comrie (eds.), Studies in ditransitive constructions, 1–64. Berlin – New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110220377.1
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110220377.1 [Google Scholar]
  47. Margetts, Anna & Peter Austin
    2007 Three-participant events in the languages of the world: towards a crosslinguistic typology. Linguistics45(3). 393–451. doi:  10.1515/LING.2007.014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/LING.2007.014 [Google Scholar]
  48. Morley, Eric A.
    2010A grammar of Ajagbe. München: Lincom.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Muraviev, Nikita
    2015 O nekotoryx služebnyx edinicax s neopredelennoj kategorial’noj prinadležnost’ju v jazyke akebu [Some grammatical elements of unspecified categories in Akebu]. Issledovanija po jazykam Afriki [Studies on African languages] 5. 201–221. Moscow: Ključ-S.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. 2016 Strategii kodirovanija finitnyx sentencial’nyx aktantov v jazyke akebu [Strategies of finite sentential complements encoding in Akebu]. Issledovanija po jazykam Afriki [Studies on African languages] 6. 195–210. Moscow: Ključ-S.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Osam, Emmanuel Kweku
    1994 Aspects of Akan grammar: A functional perspective. University of Oregon, Eugene: PhD dissertation.
  52. 1996 The object relation in Akan. Afrika und Übersee79. 57–83.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 1997 Serial verbs and grammatical relations in Akan. In Talmy Givón (ed.), Grammatical relations: A functionalist perspective, 253–279. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.35.07osa
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.35.07osa [Google Scholar]
  54. 2000 The status of the indirect object in Akan. Journal of Asian and African Studies59. 171–177.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Say, Sergey
    2014 Bivalent verb classes in the languages of Europe. Language Dynamics and Change4(1). 116–166. 10.1163/22105832‑00401003
    https://doi.org/10.1163/22105832-00401003 [Google Scholar]
  56. Shluinsky, Andrey
    2008 Bitranzitivnye glagoly v jazykax kva i sintaksičeskij status ix ob”ektov (na materialie ève i akan) [Ditransitive verbs in Kwa and syntactic status of their objects (based on Ewe and Akan)]. In Viktor Vinogradov & Victor Prokhomovsky (eds.), Issledovanija po jazykam Afriki2, 90–137. Moscow: Institut jazykoznanija RAN.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 2012 Ob”ekty v bitranzitivnoj konstrukcii v jazykax kva: vnutrigenetičeckoe sopostavlenie [Objects in Kwa ditransitive construction: an intragenetic comparison]. Afrikanskij sbornik 2011 300–318. St. Petersburg: Lema.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. 2017 An intragenetic typology of Kwa serial verb constructions. Linguistic Typology21(2). 333–385. doi:  10.1515/lingty‑2017‑0008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2017-0008 [Google Scholar]
  59. Song, Jae Jung
    1997 The history of Micronesian possessive classifiers and benefactive marking in Oceanic languages. Oceanic Linguistics36(1). 29–64. doi:  10.2307/3623070
    https://doi.org/10.2307/3623070 [Google Scholar]
  60. Sossoukpe, Jacques
    2017 Effet voisant du ton bas flottant sur les obstruantes en akebou. In Firmin Ahoua and Benjamin Ohi Elugbe (eds.), Typologie et documentation des langues en Afrique de l’Ouest. Les actes du 27eme Congrès de la société de linguistique de l’Afrique de l’Ouest (SLAO), 139–146. Paris: L’Harmattan.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Stewart, John M.
    1963 Some restrictions on objects in Twi. Journal of West African Languages2(2). 145–149.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Stewart, John
    1989 Kwa. In John Bendor-Samuel (ed.), The Niger-Congo languages, 217–245. Lanham: University press of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Storch, Anne , and Yao Koffi
    2000 Noun classes and consonant alternation in Akebu (Kə̀gbə̀rə̄kə́). In Antje Meissner & Anne Storch (eds.), Frankfurter Afrikanistische Blätter12. Nominal classification in African languages, 79–98. Köln: Rüdiger Köppe Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Leynseele, Hélène van
    1975 Restrictions on serial verbs in Anyi. Journal of West African Languages10(2). 189–218.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Wolf, Franz
    1907 Grammatik des Kögbörikö (Togo). Anthropos2. 422–437, 795–820.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): adnominal ditransitives; Akebu; alignment; ditransitive constructions; Kwa; rarissima
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error