Universal #289

Legacy number: 289

 Number  288
 Original  If a causative morpheme in any language can express permissiveness, it can usually also express factitivity.
 Standardized  IF a causative morpheme can express permissiveness, THEN it can usually also express factitivity.
 Formula  causative morpheme expresses permissiveness ⇒ causative morpheme expresses factitivity
 Keywords  causative, permissive, factitive
 Domain  morphology, semantics
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  statistical
 Basis  languages mentioned in Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1969, Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1973
 Source  see Vardul’ 1969, referring to Nedjalkov, Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1969: 29, Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1973: 11

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
1. This implication can be exemplified by Adygei (N. Caucasian), Aymara (Andean), Blackfoot (Algonquian), Georgian (S. Caucasian), Quechua (Andean), Nanaian, Evenki (both Tungus, Altaic), Japanese (Japanese-Ryukyuan), Nivkh (isolate), Turkish, and Mongolian (both Altaic) languages, etc. The reverse is not always found. For example, permissiveness is not found to accompany factivitity in Arabic (Semitic, Afro-Asiatic), Basque (isolate), Zulu (Bantoid, Benue-Congo), Indonesian (Malayo-Polynesian), and Takelma (isolate) (Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1969: 29, 1973: 11).2. In FACTITIVE causation, the only or primary source of changes in the referential plane is the causing subject, e.g. Russian: Ja velel emu prijti ‘I ordered him to come’, ja pozval ego ‘I invited him’, ja zakryl dver’ ‘I closed the door’, ja ispugal ego ‘I frightened him’. In PERMISSIVE causation the primary source of these changes is the caused subject, and the role of the causing subject is reduced to permitting or obstructing the changes: ja [ne] razreshil emu prijti ‘I [did not] allow(ed) him to come’, ja [ne] vpustil ego ‘I [did not] let him in’, on [ne] dal dveri zakryt’sja ‘he [did not] let the door close’. 3. Cf. #1586.
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
1. This implication can be exemplified by Adygei (N. Caucasian), Aymara (Andean), Blackfoot (Algonquian), Georgian (S. Caucasian), Quechua (Andean), Nanaian, Evenki (both Tungus, Altaic), Japanese (Japanese-Ryukyuan), Nivkh (isolate), Turkish, and Mongolian (both Altaic) languages, etc. The reverse is not always found. For example, permissiveness is not found to accompany factivitity in Arabic (Semitic, Afro-Asiatic), Basque (isolate), Zulu (Bantoid, Benue-Congo), Indonesian (Malayo-Polynesian), and Takelma (isolate) (Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1969: 29, Nedjalkov & Sil’nickij 1973: 11).

2. In FACTITIVE causation, the only or primary source of changes in the referential plane is the causing subject, e.g. Russian: Ja velel emu prijti 'I ordered him to come', ja pozval ego 'I invited him', ja zakryl dver' 'I closed the door', ja ispugal ego 'I frightened him'. In PERMISSIVE causation the primary source of these changes is the caused subject, and the role of the causing subject is reduced to permitting or obstructing the changes: ja [ne] razreshil emu prijti 'I [did not] allow(ed) him to come', ja [ne] vpustil ego 'I [did not] let him in', on [ne] dal dveri zakryt'sja 'he [did not] let the door close'.

3. Cf. <a class="innerLink" href="browse.php?entry_id=1586"><img src="../img/entry.gif" border="0">