%0 Journal Article %A Zúñiga, Fernando %T Benefaction proper and surrogation %D 2014 %J Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language” %V 38 %N 3 %P 543-565 %@ 0378-4177 %R https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.38.3.05zun %K substitutive beneficiary %K deputative beneficiary %K benefactives %K surrogation %K beneficiary %I John Benjamins %X The semantic role of beneficiary is usually conceptualized in very general terms, typically without an intensive definition of what can constitute a benefit in the particular construction under study. Among those accounts that have proposed to discuss benefaction as related to the notion(s) of surrogation, substituting, and/or deputing, Kittilä (2005) proposes a distinction between recipients, beneficiaries, and recipient-beneficiaries based on the binary features [reception] and [substitutive benefaction]; the recipient includes only reception (and the beneficiary only substitutive benefaction), whereas both features are relevant with recipient-beneficiaries.This paper proposes an alternative account (i) by defining benefaction proper in terms of a prototype related to possession (and thereby to reception) and a periphery, and (ii) by defining surrogation as a separate notion that can, but need not, coalesce with benefaction proper. Thus, the beneficiaries’ condition improves because they are relieved from having to carry out a given action themselves. %U https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.38.3.05zun