Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language” - Volume 47, Issue 4, 2023

The term grammaticalization originally denoted a particular outcome of language change (lexis > morphology), then got expanded to practically all studies involving language change, the processes that create such changes, and a theory modeling these. These expansions have been challenged in the literature as conceptually flawed. A usage-based analysis of the evolution of the concept culminates in the use of the term grammaticalization as a “flag” of a particular approach to linguistics. However, the theoretical premises of grammaticalization studies are entirely compatible with the premises of Diachronic Construction Grammar (DCxG). All studies within the “expanded” concept of grammaticalization can be explicitly modeled within DCxG, which provides formalism of sufficient detail to map the gradual nature of language change in cases of grammaticalization and beyond. Consequently, the most vigorous attacks on grammaticalization lose power when grammaticalization is seen as part of a larger, more complete theory of language and language change.

There is high hope that corpus-based approaches to language complexity will contribute to explaining linguistic diversity. Several complexity indices have consequently been proposed to compare different aspects among languages, especially in phonology and morphology. However, their robustness against changes in corpus size and content hasn’t been systematically assessed, thus impeding comparability between studies. Here, we systematically test the robustness of four complexity indices estimated from raw texts and either routinely utilized in crosslinguistic studies (Type-Token Ratio and word-level Entropy) or more recently proposed (Word Information Density and Lexical Diversity). Our results on 47 languages strongly suggest that traditional indices are more prone to fluctuation than the newer ones. Additionally, we confirm with Word Information Density the existence of a cross-linguistic trade-off between word-internal and across-word distributions of information. Finally, we implement a proof of concept suggesting that modern deep-learning language models can improve the comparability across languages with non-parallel datasets.

The present work attempts to examine the relationship between grammar and discourse. (i) First, it compares Warrongo (an ergative language that has antipassives and an S/O pivot) and English (an accusative language that has passives and an S/A pivot). Despite these polar opposite morphosyntactic characteristics, Warrongo and English behave almost in the same way in discourse – in terms of new mentions, lexical mentions and topic continuity. There are, however, two differences in discourse. First, Warrongo antipassives and S/O pivot have much higher functional loads than English passives and S/A pivot. Second, Warrongo antipassives have a use that English passives do not have. (ii) Then, the present work shows that grammar and discourse are not independent of each other and that they share one principle. The hierarchy of “O > S > A” is attested in grammar and discourse crosslinguistically and irrespective of the morphosyntactic types of the languages concerned.

In Gutob (Munda, India) S/A indexes can attach to other hosts apart from the verb, unconstrained by syntax. Previous studies have described non-verbal index placement in Gutob as exceptional, establishing verbal indexes as the default. This paper presents the first case study on the placement of Gutob indexes based on corpus data. Our analysis shows that although index placement in Gutob is in fact conditioned by discourse effects, non-verbal clitics cannot be considered particularly exceptional. They are employed to allocate attention to constituents and express engagement with a particular piece of information. In other languages where index placement is similarly flexible, it has been ascribed to the host being in focus. However, we argue although the effects of index placement in Gutob might pertain to what is usually subsumed under this category, other effects like newness, quantification, requested information or negation are not necessarily associated with index placement in Gutob.

This paper proposes an analysis of telicity in motion predicates within the framework of the Exo-Skeletal Model (Borer 2005b). We hypothesize that a motion event is syntactically represented by a Path component, the core of which is a vP that introduces a Figure argument. This Path component is interpreted as quantity in the sense of Borer (2005b) when there is a certain type of morpheme present in the structure, such as a verb that denotes the reaching of an endpoint. A quantity Path component can then assign a semantic value to a functional projection called AspQP, which returns a telic interpretation. Data from Mandarin, Ghanaian Student Pidgin, and Southern Tati show AspQP can be assigned a value either with or without overt head movement. We further propose a distinction between Path and direction, which explains data that were left unexplained in previous studies and seemingly contradict our claim.

This article deals with simulative derivations, meaning ‘pretend (to be) X’, where X stands for a verb or a noun. It shows that these derivations have three main origins: incorporation, denominal derivation and combination of reflexive and causative. It also systematically discusses the corresponding analytic constructions.