<div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Claudia,</div><div><br></div><div>Yes, I agree with your impressions that these functions are rare. I imagine they're connected to a broad network of related grammaticalization pathways, but those particular developments don't seem very common.</div><div><br></div><div>Regarding posture STAND (vs. change-of-position STAND), the much more typical development is as a marker of continuous activity (if fully semantically bleached, progressive/imperfective/durative aspect). (Does Savosavo have distinct verbs for posture vs. change-of-position?) The only related observation that comes to mind is that perhaps it has something to do with taking a behavioral position and holding it. That is, "steadfast" perhaps in a somewhat defiant way. That seems to be the explanation (if I'm interpreting it correctly) for a number of South Asian languages (at least Indo-Aryan and Dravidian, I believe) where SIT has become a marker of defiant or unexpected/undesirable action (in the misleadingly so-called "compound verb" constructions), and I think that may be more of a continuous posture verb than change-of-posture verb, but I'm not certain.</div><div><br></div><div><div><div>Causative SVCs with TAKE are briefly mentioned in Lovestrand (2018:45), with reference to Yoruba, so that might be helpful.</div><div><a href="https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:39406562-02d3-46f5-abf3-180d22225925">https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:39406562-02d3-46f5-abf3-180d22225925</a></div><div><br></div><div>Since I haven't been looking for the functions you describe specifically, there are of course likely to be more examples out there, but I think it's safe to say they're not common or typical for these sorts of developments for SVCs. Thanks for sharing the interesting data.</div><div><br></div></div><div>By the way, English actually has a sort of causative construction with TAKE: "I took him to eat" , or sometimes with a passive (either BE or GET) as in "I took him to get inspected". I imagine this usage develops naturally out of the transfer sense of TAKE (also common in SVCs), so maybe that's related to what you're describing. It's not a typical pattern I've seen described for TAKE SVCs, but I'd be a little cautious interpreting that because my impression is that a lot of research on SVCs (including but to a lesser degree even in descriptive grammars) is biased by semantic expectations (see the previously linked slides). Certain "typical" semantic types of SVCs are very likely to be reported, while other possible variants may not be mentioned, so it's hard to know if there is or is not any more variation among the possible semantic types than what is reported in a typical paper or grammar.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Daniel<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 5:21 AM Claudia Wegener <<a href="mailto:claudia.wegener@uni-koeln.de">claudia.wegener@uni-koeln.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Hi Daniel,</p>
<p>thanks, yes, I am aware of those functions of 'take' SVCs (also
discussed in Lee (2019), which I'm sure you will know) and
Lefebvre's work. 'Take' to Inceptive was not so much my interest,
but thanks for the interesting slides!<br>
</p>
<p>The language I'm working on (Savosavo, Non-Austronesian) does use
transitive 'take' in SVCs as the general marker for causation. The
subject of 'take' is the causer, and object of 'take' is subject
of the (necessarily intransitive) verb that follows. It is never
used in any intransitive form or in any way altered in morphology
or phonetic form. I agree that the development has to have
followed a path from what you said below ("The more common pattern
seems to me to be 'Take NP (and) V (it)', so not causative in
terms of alignment but similar in function. I'm not sure about
whether or how often that pattern might shift alignment to 'Make
NP V'."), i.e. in symmetrical, sequential serial verb
constructions first, and then extended to asymmetrical SVCs, with
the shifted alignment pattern. I do find it a bit puzzling that it
seems to have happened so rarely in other languages, even though
it seems a perfectly intuitive development to me :) <br>
</p>
<p>Also in light of the other answers I received so far, I guess it
is quite safe to say then that this development is rather rare...</p>
<p>As for my question about 'stand' ->
inchoative/inceptive/ingressive, I did mean 'stand' in the sense
of 'be standing'; Savosavo does have a separate (though related)
word for 'stand/get up', which is not used for this grammatical
function.<br>
</p>
<p>Thanks again, best wishes,</p>
<p>Claudia<br>
</p>
<p>References<br>
</p>
<p>Lee, Taegyeong. 2019. A cross-linguistic typology of ‘take’
serial verb constructions. Albuquerque, New Mexico: University of
New Mexico MA thesis. <a href="https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/69" target="_blank">https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/ling_etds/69</a>.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div>On 20-Aug-20 01:38, Daniel Ross wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Hi Claudia,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>TAKE is extremely common in transitive functions in serial
verb constructions, with a range of meanings including
instrumental, comitative and sometimes just accusative.
There's no shortage of literature on the topic (including
several more papers by Lefebvre), but for a preliminary
large-scale survey, see:</div>
<div><a href="https://swl8.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/Ross_Lovestrand_SWL8.pdf" target="_blank">https://swl8.sciencesconf.org/data/pages/Ross_Lovestrand_SWL8.pdf</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>However, TAKE is rarer as an intransitive auxiliary with
inceptive (or similar) semantics. One specific regional
exception is "TAKE AND V" pseudocoordination as found in
dozens of European languages. The meaning is similar to "GO
AND V", in the sense of surprise, unexpectedness, defiance,
self-initiative, etc. This has been written about by a number
of authors, but I am working on a more comprehensive survey in
Eurasia, where I've so far identified this usage in about 60
languages:</div>
<div><a href="http://publish.illinois.edu/djross3/files/2013/11/Ross-tomar-y.pdf" target="_blank">http://publish.illinois.edu/djross3/files/2013/11/Ross-tomar-y.pdf</a></div>
<div>(Slides in Spanish, but should be easy enough to follow
with the maps.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Aside from pseudocoordination (or rare asyndetic variants)
within that geographic area, SVCs (etc.) with "take" are quite
rare in that intransitive sense. Something like that is found
in Haitian Creole, and there's an auxiliary in Arabic that is
similar, but in general this particular semantic configuration
seems anomalously common in Europe (suggesting contact
effects, but with unclear and possibly many pathways, as
discussed in the slides). Another related usage is
auto-benefactive "take" (as opposed to "give"), as described
by Creissels 2010 for example (cited in the slides).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The meanings I've described above are not causative
exactly, but I think somewhat semantically related to that
might give you more information to consider. Further
grammaticalization into marking a causative seems plausible
from TAKE SVCs, for example. The more common pattern seems to
me to be "Take NP (and) V (it)", so not causative in terms of
alignment but similar in function. I'm not sure about whether
or how often that pattern might shift alignment to "Make NP
V".<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>STAND/GET UP is used similarly to the TAKE (AND)
construction above, in Arabic and some other languages of the
Middle East (presumably also due to contact), sort of blending
into the edges of the TAKE AND distribution. For Arabic,
search for research on "qam" (and cognates in different
varieties), often grammaticalized as an ingressive particle in
colloquial varieties.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'd be happy to discuss this topic more, but that addresses
at least the specific questions asked. I'd be interested to
hear more about your research on these topics. I can supply
additional references if you'd like. (Feel free to write
off-list if you prefer.)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Daniel<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 4:03
PM Claudia Wegener <<a href="mailto:claudia.wegener@uni-koeln.de" target="_blank">claudia.wegener@uni-koeln.de</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Dear all, <br>
</p>
<p>It was suggested to me that grammaticalization of the
verb 'take' to a causative marker is typologically
unusual, and indeed, apart from the mention of Twi and
Nupe (in Kuteva et al. 2019 and sources cited therein) and
Fon (Lefebvre 1991) I have found little to no information
on languages where this has happened... Would any of you
know any other languages and could point me towards
publications I could cite? <br>
</p>
<p>And related to this, I have been even less successful at
finding languages where the verb for 'to stand' (as
posture verb) has been grammaticalized to function as a
marker for ingressive - if you know of any, would you be
so kind to point me to any publications?</p>
<p>Many thanks in advance,</p>
<p>Claudia</p>
<p>References:<br>
</p>
<p> </p>
<p><span style="line-height:107%" lang="EN-GB">Lefebvre,
Claire. 1991. <i>Take</i> serial verb constructions in
Fon. In Claire Lefebvre (ed.), <i>Serial Verbs:
Grammatical, Comparative</i> <i>and Cognitive
Approaches</i>, 37-78. Amsterdam, Philadelphia:
Benjamins. <br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height:107%" lang="EN-GB">Kuteva,
Tania, Bernd Heine, Bo Hong, Haiping Long, Heiko Narrog
& Seongha Rhee (eds.). 2019. <i>World Lexicon of
Grammaticalization</i>, 2nd edition. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.</span></p>
<pre cols="72">--
Claudia Wegener
Abteilung Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
Institut für Linguistik
Universität zu Köln
Albertus-Magnus-Platz
50923 Köln</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<pre cols="72">--
Claudia Wegener
Abteilung Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft
Institut für Linguistik
Universität zu Köln
Albertus-Magnus-Platz
50923 Köln</pre>
</div>
</blockquote></div>