Bernard Comrie’s research while affiliated with University of California, Santa Barbara and other places

Numeral systems in natural languages show astonishing variety, though with very strong unifying tendencies that are increasing as many indigenous numeral systems disappear through language contact and globalization. Most numeral systems make use of a base, typically 10, less commonly 20, followed by a wide range of other possibilities. Higher numerals are formed from primitive lower numerals by applying the processes of addition and multiplication, in many languages also exponentiation; sometimes, however, numerals are formed from a higher numeral, using subtraction or division. Numerous complexities and idiosyncrasies are discussed, as are numeral systems that fall outside this general characterization, such as restricted numeral systems with no internal arithmetic structure, and some New Guinea extended body-part counting systems.

This article explores the connection between expression of valency alternations and the overall morphological typology of a language from a cross-linguistic perspective. On the basis of a typological survey of empirical data in 40 geographically and genealogically diverse languages, it finds two universal tendencies relating to the scale of morphological types from most to least bound: fusional – agglutinative – isolating. First, the compatibility of morphological techniques used to express valency alternations does not extend further left than the overall morphological typology of the language. Second, it may extend further right, with extensive attestation of this possibility. The morphological expression of valency alternations is thus constrained by the overall morphology of the language, but tends to be pushed further towards the right.

Three examples are presented of reanalyses of antipassives as or in the direction of ordinary transitive constructions, from Tsez, Chukchi, and Mayan languages. In all cases, an antipassive construction remains in the language or language family concerned, thus presenting empirical evidence of reanalysis to parallel earlier hypothesized reconstructions of antipassives to explain synchronic idiosyncrasies

This book provides a comprehensive treatment of the morpho-syntactic and semantic aspects of the antipassive construction from synchronic, diachronic, and typological perspectives. The nineteen contributions assembled in this volume address a wide range of aspects pertinent to the antipassive construction, such as lexical semantics, the properties of the antipassive markers, as well as the issue of fuzzy boundaries between the antipassive construction and a range of other formally and functionally similar constructions in genealogically and areally diverse languages. Purely synchronically oriented case studies are supplemented by contributions that shed light on the diachronic development of the antipassive construction and the antipassive markers. The book should be of central interest to many scholars, in particular to those working in the field of language typology, semantics, syntax, and historical linguists, as well as to specialists of the language families discussed in the individual contributions.

This article addresses affective ("experiencer") constructions in the Tsezic languages (Nakh-Daghestanian), which represent the most frequent type of non-canonical subject constructions in these languages. They differ from transitive constructions in a number of ways that go far beyond case marking and affect various domains of grammar (e.g. inflectional morphology, complex clause structures, reflexive and reciprocal binding, etc.). In this paper, we explore morphological, syntactic and semantic features of Tsezic affective constructions from a typological perspective. We investigate variation, stability, and change between the constructions in the various Tsezic languages and try to give explanations for the observed patterns of variation.

This volume presents a cross-linguistic investigation of clausal noun-modifying constructions in genetically varied languages of Eurasia. Contrary to a common premise that, in any language, adnominal clauses that share some features of relative clauses constitute a structurally distinct construction, some languages of Eurasia exhibit a General Noun-Modifying Clause Construction (GNMCC) -- a single construction covering a wide range of semantic relations between the head noun and the clause. Through in-depth examination of naturally-occurring and elicited data from Ainu, languages of the Caucasus (e.g. Ingush, Georgian, Bezhta, Hinuq), Japanese, Korean, Marathi, Nenets, Sino-Tibetan languages (e.g. Cantonese, Mandarin, Rawang), and Turkic languages (e.g. Turkish, Sakha), the chapters discuss whether or not the language in question exhibits a GNMCC and the range of noun modification covered by such a construction. The findings afford us new facts, new theoretical perspectives and the first step toward a more global assessment of the possibilities for GNMCCs.

This volume presents a cross-linguistic investigation of clausal noun-modifying constructions in genetically varied languages of Eurasia. Contrary to a common premise that, in any language, adnominal clauses that share some features of relative clauses constitute a structurally distinct construction, some languages of Eurasia exhibit a General Noun-Modifying Clause Construction (GNMCC) -- a single construction covering a wide range of semantic relations between the head noun and the clause. Through in-depth examination of naturally-occurring and elicited data from Ainu, languages of the Caucasus (e.g. Ingush, Georgian, Bezhta, Hinuq), Japanese, Korean, Marathi, Nenets, Sino-Tibetan languages (e.g. Cantonese, Mandarin, Rawang), and Turkic languages (e.g. Turkish, Sakha), the chapters discuss whether or not the language in question exhibits a GNMCC and the range of noun modification covered by such a construction. The findings afford us new facts, new theoretical perspectives and the first step toward a more global assessment of the possibilities for GNMCCs.

This volume presents a cross-linguistic investigation of clausal noun-modifying constructions in genetically varied languages of Eurasia. Contrary to a common premise that, in any language, adnominal clauses that share some features of relative clauses constitute a structurally distinct construction, some languages of Eurasia exhibit a General Noun-Modifying Clause Construction (GNMCC) -- a single construction covering a wide range of semantic relations between the head noun and the clause. Through in-depth examination of naturally-occurring and elicited data from Ainu, languages of the Caucasus (e.g. Ingush, Georgian, Bezhta, Hinuq), Japanese, Korean, Marathi, Nenets, Sino-Tibetan languages (e.g. Cantonese, Mandarin, Rawang), and Turkic languages (e.g. Turkish, Sakha), the chapters discuss whether or not the language in question exhibits a GNMCC and the range of noun modification covered by such a construction. The findings afford us new facts, new theoretical perspectives and the first step toward a more global assessment of the possibilities for GNMCCs.

Hinuq and Bezhta, two languages of the Tsezic sub-group of the Nakh-Daghestanian (East Caucasian) language family, have General noun modifying clause constructions (GNMCCs), which have also been noted in some other Nakh-Daghestanian languages. While readily acceptable and interpretable, GNMCCs that do not receive an interpretation with a coreferential element in the modifying clause are rare in natural discourse, certainly in comparison with Japanese, and the range of types also seems more restricted. We speculate that this is because Japanese by and large lacks sentential complement structures independent of GNMCCs, and moreover because Hinuq and Bezhta do not have highly frequent GNMCCs with light nouns, whose presence in Japanese serves to make GNMCCs a much more salient feature of discourse.