Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios Edited by Walter Bisang Andrej Malchukov language Studies in Diversity Linguistics 16 science press Studies in Diversity Linguistics Chief Editor: Martin Haspelmath In this series: 1. Handschuh, Corinna. A typology of marked-S languages. 2. Rießler, Michael. Adjective attribution. 3. Klamer, Marian (ed.). The Alor-Pantar languages: History and typology. 4. Berghäll, Liisa. A grammar of Mauwake (Papua New Guinea). 5. Wilbur, Joshua. A grammar of Pite Saami. 6. Dahl, Östen. Grammaticalization in the North: Noun phrase morphosyntax in Scandinavian vernaculars. 7. Schackow, Diana. A grammar of Yakkha. 8. Liljegren, Henrik. A grammar of Palula. 9. Shimelman, Aviva. A grammar of Yauyos Quechua. 10. Rudin, Catherine & Bryan James Gordon (eds.). Advances in the study of Siouan languages and linguistics. 11. Kluge, Angela. A grammar of Papuan Malay. 12. Kieviet, Paulus. A grammar of Rapa Nui. 13. Michaud, Alexis. Tone in Yongning Na: Lexical tones and morphotonology. 14. Enfield, N. J (ed.). Dependencies in language: On the causal ontology of linguistic systems. 15. Gutman, Ariel. Attributive constructions in North-Eastern Neo-Aramaic. 16. Bisang, Walter & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios. ISSN: 2363-5568 Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios Edited by Walter Bisang Andrej Malchukov language science press Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov (eds.). 2017. Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios (Studies in Diversity Linguistics 16). Berlin: Language Science Press. This title can be downloaded at: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/152 © 2017, the authors Published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Licence (CC BY 4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN: 978-3-946234-99-9 (Digital) 978-3-96110-020-0 (Hardcover) ISSN: 2363-5568 DOI:10.5281/zenodo.823224 Source code available from www.github.com/langsci/152 Collaborative reading: paperhive.org/documents/remote?type=langsci&id=152 Cover and concept of design: Ulrike Harbort Typesetting: Iris Rieder, Felix Kopecky Proofreading: Andreea Calude, Ahmet Bilal Özdemir, Alexis Michaud, Amr El-Zawawy, Andreas Hölzl, Christian Döhler, Daniela Kolbe-Hanna, Daniela Schröder, Eran Asoulin, Gerald Delahunty, Jean Nitzke, Lea Schäfer, Marijana Janjic, Melanie Röthlisberger, Prisca Jerono, Sandra Auderset, Slavomír Čéplö, Steven Kaye, Tatiana Philippova, Valeria Quochi Fonts: Linux Libertine, Arimo, DejaVu Sans Mono Typesetting software:Ǝ X LATEX Language Science Press Unter den Linden 6 10099 Berlin, Germany langsci-press.org Storage and cataloguing done by FU Berlin Language Science Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate. Contents Preface Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov v 1 Back again to the future: How to account for directionality in grammatical change Bernd Heine, Tania Kuteva & Heiko Narrog 1 2 The origin of comitative adverbs in Japhug Guillaume Jacques 31 3 Copulas originating from the imperative of ‘see/look’ verbs in Mande languages Denis Creissels 45 4 Multiple argument marking in Bantoid: From syntheticity to analyticity Larry M. Hyman 67 5 Grammaticalization of participles and gerunds in Indo-Aryan: Preterite, future, infinitive Annie Montaut 97 6 On the grammaticalization of demonstratives in Hoocąk and other Siouan languages Johannes Helmbrecht 137 7 Grammaticalization of tense/aspect/mood marking in Yucatec Maya Christian Lehmann 173 8 Diachrony and typology of Slavic aspect: What does morphology tell us? Björn Wiemer & Ilja A. Seržant 239 Indexes 309 Preface Walter Bisang Andrej Malchukov Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz The present volume originated from the symposium on “Areal patterns ofgram- maticalization and cross-linguistic variation in grammaticalization scenarios” held on 12–14 March 2015 at Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. The main purpose of the conference was to bring together leading experts on grammatical- ization, combining expertise in grammaticalization theory with expertise in par- ticular language families, in order to explore cross-linguistic variation in gram- maticalization scenarios. The participants together with the organizers of the conference (Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov) aim at a systematic study of grammaticalization scenarios as well as research on their areal variation, all of this leading to a planned Comparative Handbook of Grammaticalization Scenar- ios and an accompanying database. Additionally, certain papers which address some of the main questions raised by the organizers of the conference have been invited to the present volume. Grammaticalization studies and grammaticalization theory have been one of the most successful research paradigms introduced in late 20th century linguis- tics. The milestone of grammaticalization research includes such works as Leh- mann (2015) on “Thoughts on Grammaticalization”, Heine et al. (1991) on “Gram- maticalization: A Conceptual Framework”, Bybee et al. (1994) on “The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect and Modality in the Languages of the World”, Heine & Kuteva (2002) on “World Lexicon of Grammaticalization” and Hopper & Trau- gott (2003) on “Grammaticalization”, to name just a few. Even critiques of gram- maticalization theory (see e.g., Newmeyer 1998, Campbell & Janda 2001; also see Lehmann 2004 for a critical response) did not stop this research, which num- bers in thousands of publications (see the monumental “The Oxford Handbook Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov. 2017. Preface. In Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov (eds.), Unity and diversity in grammaticalization scenarios, v–xii. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.1044383 Walter Bisang & Andrej Malchukov of Grammaticalization” by Narrog & Heine 2011 for the state of the art in research on grammaticalization). Yet, in spite of its obvious successes, some aspects remain controversial and are in need of further study. One aspect concerns areal variation in grammati- calization scenarios. Contrary to the alleged universality of grammaticalization processes and paths, grammaticalization shows areal variation, as was most em- phatically pointed out by Bisang with particularly telling examples from South- east Asian languages (Bisang 1996; 2004; 2011; 2015; also see Ansaldo & Lim 2004). Even though there are many grammaticalization paths in these languages, most of them characteristically diverge from such processes by the absence of the co-evolution of meaning and form as it is generally taken for granted in the literature. Thus, the semantic development of a lexical item into a marker ofa grammatical category (e.g., verbs meaning ‘give’ > benefactive markers) is not necessarily accompanied by phonetic reduction and morphologization (there are phonological properties that operate against the development of bound forms, see Ansaldo & Lim 2004). This lack of form-meaning coevolution in grammat- icalization processes in Southeast Asian languages is just one manifestation of areal variation in grammaticalization scenarios which has been underestimated in the literature. Another one is the higher relevance of pragmatic inference as it is manifested in the lack of obligatoriness and in the multifunctionality of grammaticalized markers. Second, the universality of grammaticalization pro- cesses has yet to be reconciled with a wide-spread belief that these processes are construction-specific. Given that the constructions in question are language- specific, it is an open question how one should account for cross-linguistic pat- terns of grammaticalization. While the construction-specific nature of grammat- icalization has long been acknowledged in the literature (Bybee et al. 1994), this aspect came to the fore with the advent of Construction Grammar approaches to grammaticalization (Gisborne & Patten 2011, Traugott & Trousdale 2013). Both aspects noted above raise the issue of how to reconcile universal and language- particular aspects of grammaticalization phenomena. The contributions to this volume address this issue in one way or another. Perhaps the paper by Bernd Heine, Tania Kuteva and Heiko Narrog on “Back again to the future: How to account for directionality in grammatical change?” addresses this question heads on. Drawing on material from Khoisan languages but also on comparative data from Germanic, the authors trace the development of future markers. They note that though originally we are dealing with different source constructions including motion verbs, all of them result in a future mean- ing. The answer which the authors give to the puzzle stated above, is that con- vi structional details within or across languages do not preclude universality. They suggest that universality should be formulated in functional (semantic, cognitive) terms as a semantic relation between the source and the target concepts (here the relation between directed spatial movement and the meaning of future). This is a very interesting solution to the problem, even if it is formulated in a rather abso- lute manner. After all, it is clear that in other cases constructional details would matter, as in the case of ‘give’-verbs that develop into benefactive markersin constructions with a verbal host or into a dative marker in constructions with a nominal host. It remains to be seen if the notion of ‘host’