<div dir="ltr"><p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Dear Martin,</span></p>

<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>

<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I agree that any
definition of a comparative concept will likely result in the exclusion of some
“legacy cases”. Given that you are using “passive” as a comparative concept in a
very ambitious sense and given that you have all human languages in mind and
would like to have a definition as clear and inclusive as possible, there is
the question of the extent of the cases that will be excluded by the definition
you referred to. To what extent are passives described in specific language
grammars coded with an affix on the verb and to what extent are they not?  Does anyone on this list server have a more or
less clear answer on this? Then as for the possibility of a definition of passive
that might also cover cases like Mandarin, how about the replacement of a
passive affix on the verb with a grammatical morpheme primarily associated with
the expression of a passive meaning? Would that work?  </span></p>

<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p>

<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Best regards,</span></p>

<p class="gmail-MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Chao</span></p></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 1:03 PM Martin Haspelmath <<a href="mailto:martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.de">martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.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>
    Yes, comparative concepts cannot be right or wrong, but traditional
    terms can be defined in a better or less good way. Note that the
    original question by Ian Joo used the traditional term "passive",
    assuming that we know what it means (not necessarily assuming that
    "passive" is a concept that is useful for typological
    generalizations).<br>
    <div><br>
    </div>
    <div>Good definitions of traditional terms are (i) clear (i.e. based
      on clear concepts) and (ii) largely coextensive with legacy
      usage. </div>
    <div><br>
    </div>
    <div>Traditional terms can rarely be defined clearly in such a way
      that the definition covers ALL legacy cases. So while the Chinese
      <i>bèi </i>
      construction is similar to the Swahili Passive, I don’t see that
      we can have a definition of <i>passive</i> that covers both.
      Maybe even the English Passive is not included. </div>
    <div><br>
    </div>
    <div>By contrast, I don’t see why Papuan Malay <i>dapa-pukul</i>
      shouldn’t be included. Isn’t <i>dapa-</i> a passive prefix? (And
      similarly Riau Indonesian <i>kena-pukul</i>.)<br>
    </div>
    <div><br>
    </div>
    <div>Best,</div>
    Martin<br>
    <br>
    <div>Am 22.03.21 um 12:25 schrieb David Gil:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      
      <p>Martin,</p>
      <p>As you've pointed out on numerous occasions, comparative
        concepts can't be right or wrong, they can only be more or less
        useful as tools for typological generalizations.  Still, with
        that in mind, I suspect that a comparative concept of "passive"
        that subsumes, say, the rather garden-variety constructions in
        (1) and (2), rather than excluding them on the grounds that the
        verb lacks an affix, as you would have things, will turn out to
        be more useful for typologists (not to mention conforming more
        closely with common every-day usage).</p>
      <p>(1) Riau Indonesian<br>
            <i>Yusuf kena pukul sama Musa</i><br>
            Yusuf PASS hit together Musa<br>
            'Yusuf got hit by Musa'<br>
            [cf. "active" <i>Musa pukul Yusuf</i>]</p>
      <p>(1) Papuan Malay<br>
            <i>Yusuf dapa pukul dari Musa</i><br>
            Yusuf PASS hit from Musa<br>
            'Yusuf got hit by Musa'<br>
            [cf. "active" <i>Musa pukul Yusuf</i>]</p>
      <p>David</p>
      <p><br>
      </p>
      <div>On 22/03/2021 08:24, Martin
        Haspelmath wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        
        Yes, the definition that I use presupposes an understanding of
        "verb-coded" and "adposition", but this is typical of
        definitions: They work only if their component parts are defined
        or understood clearly. <br>
        <br>
        So is <i>bèi</i> a verb-coding element in (1) and (4)? It could
        be said to be "verb-phrase coding" (as David notes), but the
        notion of "verb phrase" is not cross-linguistically applicable
        in an obvious way. So I would restrict "passive" (as a
        comparative concept) to forms where the verb has an affix
        (because this is the only situation in which the two sister
        constructions are clearly asymmetric). Now is <i>bèi</i> a
        prefix in (1)? This would be possible only if <i>bèi</i> in (1)
        and <i>bèi</i> in (4) are two different elements – and it seems
        that we do not want to say this.<br>
        <br>
        Chao rightly asks: "In what sense is the English passive
        construction verb-coded?" The English Passive includes an
        Auxiliary, but there is no good cross-linguistic definition of
        "auxiliary", so we don't want to say that auxiliaries can be
        criterial for passives. Some English verbs have what looks like
        a passive affix (e.g. <i>-en</i> in <i>tak-en</i>), but the
        English Passive construction does not clearly fall under the
        definition that I gave. (A good illustration of "passive" is
        Siewierska's first example in her WALS chapter, from Swahili: <i>chakula
          kilipik-<b>wa</b> (na Hamisi)</i> 'The food was cooked by
        Hamisi').<br>
        <br>
        There is a tradition of appealing to "tests for subject
        properties" (going back to Keenan 1976), but this seems
        appropriate only at the language-particular level. Since these
        tests are different in different languages, this approach does
        not work well in a comparative context.<br>
        <br>
        Best,<br>
        Martin<br>
        <br>
        <div>Am 21.03.21 um 20:28 schrieb David
          Gil:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote type="cite">
          <p>Chao, Martin,<br>
            <br>
            I agree with Chao's characterization of Mandarin (1) as
            being a passive under most or all reasonable definitions
            thereof; however, I fail to see why (4) cannot also be
            considered to be a passive.  In (4), <i>bèi</i> is not
            flagging <i>jĭngchá</i> 'police' but rather is marking the
            entire phrase <i>jĭngchá tuō-zŏu-le</i>
             — it may thus be analyzed as an instance
            of "verb(-phrase) coding".  <br>
            <br>
            Many Southeast Asian languages have paradigms which
            correspond to that in (1) - (4) except that, in the
            counterpart of (4), the agent phrase follows rather than
            precedes the verb.  Such constructions are commonly referred
            to as "passives", or, more specifically, as "periphrastic"
            or sometimes "adversative passives".  Moreover, in such
            languages, the counterpart of Mandarin <i>bèi</i> is
            presumably also applying to the verb-plus-agent phrase as a
            whole.  So the only obvious difference between such
            constructions and Mandarin (4) is that of word order.  (I
            say "*obvious* difference" because it may be the case that
            syntactic tests will show that <i>jĭngchá</i> in (4) has
            more subject properties than do the usual Southeast Asian
            postverbal agent phrases, in which case the prototypicality
            of (4) as a passive would decrease accordingly.  But has
            anybody shown this to be the case?)</p>
          <p>David</p>
          <p><br>
          </p>
          <div>On 21/03/2021 19:31, Chao Li
            wrote:<br>
          </div>
          <blockquote type="cite">
            <div dir="ltr">
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>Dear Martin,</span></p>
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>It perhaps depends on what you mean
                  by “verb-coded”. For example, in what sense is the
                  English passive construction verb-coded? In a Mandarin
                  sentence like (1), the meaning is passive and
                  crucially it is coded with the passive morpheme <i>bèi</i>,
                  which historically could be used as a verb that means
                  “to suffer”. The single argument in (1) can also
                  correspond to the Patient argument of an active
                  sentence like (2) or (3). Moreover, it can be said
                  that the Agent argument gets suppressed in (1).
                  Therefore, it appears reasonable to analyze (1) as a
                  passive construction both Chinese-internally and
                  crosslinguistically. As for whether a </span> <i>bèi</i><span>-construction like (4) can be
                  analyzed as a passive construction that fits the
                  definition, such an analysis is possible if one
                  accepts the (controversial and debatable) assumption
                  that <i>bèi</i> in (4) assumes not only its primary
                  role of being a passive marker but also an additional
                  role of being a preposition. </span></p>
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span></p>
              <img src="cid:1785b429b5dcb971f161" alt="image.png" width="412" height="253">
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span><span>  </span><br>
              </p>
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>Best regards,</span></p>
              <p style="text-align:justify;margin:0cm;font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><span>Chao</span></p>
            </div>
            <br>
            <div class="gmail_quote">
              <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at
                10:07 AM Martin Haspelmath <<a href="mailto:martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.de" target="_blank">martin_haspelmath@eva.mpg.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> According to my favourite definition of "passive
                  construction", these Mandarin examples are
                  (apparently) not passive constructions:<br>
                  <br>
                  <font size="-1">"A passive voice construction is a
                    verb-coded valency construction (i) whose sister
                    valency construction is transitive and not
                    verb-coded, and (ii) which has an S-argument
                    corresponding to the transitive P, and (iii) which
                    has a suppressed or oblique-flagged argument
                    corresponding to the transitive A".</font><br>
                  <br>
                  According to this definition, a passive construction
                  "marks both the agent and the verb" (unless the agent
                  is suppressed or otherwise absent). But Ian Joo's
                  question was probably about languages where the SAME
                  marker can occur on the verb and on the oblique agent.
                  This would be very unusual, because passive voice
                  markers are not expected to be similar to an oblique
                  agent flag.<br>
                  <br>
                  Now my question is: Are these Mandarin (and
                  Shanghainese) BEI/GEI-constructions passives? They
                  have traditionally been called passives, but since the
                  BEI element is obligatory, while the agent can be
                  omitted (<i>Zhangsan bei (Lisi) da le</i> 'Zhangsan
                  was hit (by Lisi)'), it cannot be a preposition or
                  case prefix. At least that would seem to follow from
                  the definition of "affix/adposition". So I think this
                  construction doesn't fall under a rigorous definition
                  of "passive construction". (Rather, it is a sui
                  generis construction.)<br>
                  <br>
                  Some authors might say that it is a "noncanonical
                  passive" (cf. Legate, Julie Anne. 2021. Noncanonical
                  passives: A typology of voices in an impoverished
                  Universal Grammar. <i>Annual Review of Linguistics</i>
                  7(1). doi:<a href="https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031920-114459" target="_blank">10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031920-114459</a>),
                  but there does not seem to be a clear limit to this
                  vague notion (is every topicalization construction a
                  noncanonical passive?). I do not know of a fully
                  explicit definition of "passive construction" that
                  clearly includes the Mandarin BEI constructions.<br>
                  <span title="url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fzotero.org%3A2&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1146%2Fannurev-linguistics-031920-114459&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Noncanonical%20passives%3A%20A%20typology%20of%20voices%20in%20an%20impoverished%20Universal%20Grammar&rft.jtitle=Annual%20Review%20of%20Linguistics&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=1&rft.aufirst=Julie%20Anne&rft.aulast=Legate&rft.au=Julie%20Anne%20Legate&rft.date=2021"></span><br>
                  Best wishes,<br>
                  Martin<br>
                  <br>
                  <div>Am 28.02.21 um 19:46 schrieb bingfu Lu:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote type="cite">
                    <div>
                      <div dir="ltr">A
                        better example in Mandarin may be:</div>
                      <div dir="ltr">
                        <div><span>Zhangsan
                            bei-Lisi      gei-da-le.</span><br>
                          <span>Zhangsan
                            PASS-Lisi  PASS-hit-PRF</span><br>
                          <span>`Zhangsan
                            was hit by Lisi.'</span></div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="ltr">'bei'
                          is etymologically related to 'suffer' while‘给’
                          to 'give'.</div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="ltr">In
                          fact, </div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><span><span>Zhangsan
                              bei-(Lisi)      da-le.</span></span><br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><font face="Helvetica Neue,
                            Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif" color="#26282a">can also change to</font></div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><font face="Helvetica Neue,
                            Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif" color="#26282a"><span><span>Zhangsan
                                gei-(Lisi)      da-le.</span></span><br>
                          </font></div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><font face="Helvetica Neue,
                            Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif" color="#26282a"><span><span><br>
                              </span></span></font></div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><font face="Helvetica Neue,
                            Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif" color="#26282a">Furthermore, in
                            Shanghainese, the PASS is a morpheme
                            homophonic to the morpheme for 'give'.</font></div>
                        <div dir="ltr"><font face="Helvetica Neue,
                            Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif" color="#26282a"><br>
                          </font></div>
                        <div dir="ltr">regards,<br>
                        </div>
                        <div dir="ltr">Bingfu
                          Lu</div>
                        <div dir="ltr">Beijing
                          Language University</div>
                        <br>
                      </div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                    <div id="gmail-m_-9220910343995609513gmail-m_-7067846232154779631ydp9b85d7ebyahoo_quoted_4775567649">
                      <div>
                        <div> On Sunday, February 28, 2021, 10:26:36 PM
                          GMT+8, JOO, Ian [Student] <a href="mailto:ian.joo@connect.polyu.hk" target="_blank"><ian.joo@connect.polyu.hk></a>
                          wrote: </div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div><br>
                        </div>
                        <div>
                          <div id="gmail-m_-9220910343995609513gmail-m_-7067846232154779631ydp9b85d7ebyiv9747170334">
                            <div>
                              <div>
                                <div>Dear typologists,<br>
                                  <br>
                                  I wonder if you are aware of any
                                  language whose passive construction
                                  marks both the agent and the verb.<br>
                                  For example, in Mandarin, the agent
                                  receives the passive marker <em>bei.</em><br>
                                  <br>
                                  (1) Zhangsan bei-Lisi da-le.<br>
                                  Zhangsan PASS-Lisi hit-PRF<br>
                                  `Zhangsan was hit by Lisi.'<br>
                                  <br>
                                  When the agent is omitted, the verb
                                  receives <em>bei</em>.<br>
                                  <br>
                                  (2) Zhangsan bei-da-le.<br>
                                  Zhangsan PASS-hit-PRF<br>
                                  `Zhangsan was hit.'<br>
                                  <br>
                                  But, in some occasions, both the agent
                                  and the verb receive <em>bei</em>:<br>
                                  <br>
                                  (3) Zhangsan bei-Lisi bei-da-le.<br>
                                  Zhangsan PASS-Lisi PASS-hit-PRF<br>
                                  `Zhangsan was hit by Lisi.'<br>
                                  <br>
                                  Are you aware of any other language
                                  where a construction like (3) is
                                  possible?<br>
                                  The only one I am aware of at the
                                  moment is Vietnamese.<br>
                                  I would greatly appreciate any help.</div>
                              </div>
                              <div><br>
                                Regards,
                                <div>Ian</div>
                              </div>
                              <img alt="" src="https://www.polyu.edu.hk/emaildisclaimer/PolyU_Email_Signature.jpg">
                              <p><br>
                                <em><font size="3" face="Times New
                                    Roman">Disclaimer:</font></em></p>
                              <p style="margin-left:0.5in"><i><font size="3" face="Times New Roman" color="black"><span>This message
                                      (including any attachments)
                                      contains confidential information
                                      intended for a specific individual
                                      and purpose. If you are not the
                                      intended recipient, you should
                                      delete this message and notify the
                                      sender and The Hong Kong
                                      Polytechnic University (the
                                      University) immediately. Any
                                      disclosure, copying, or
                                      distribution of this message, or
                                      the taking of any action based on
                                      it, is strictly prohibited and may
                                      be unlawful.</span></font></i></p>
                              <p style="margin-left:0.5in"><i><span><font style="background-color:inherit" size="3" face="Times New Roman">The
                                      University specifically denies any
                                      responsibility for the accuracy or
                                      quality of information obtained
                                      through University E-mail
                                      Facilities. Any views and opinions
                                      expressed are only those of the
                                      author(s) and do not necessarily
                                      represent those of the University
                                      and the University accepts no
                                      liability whatsoever for any
                                      losses or damages incurred or
                                      caused to any party as a result of
                                      the use of such information.</font></span></i></p>
                            </div>
                          </div>
_______________________________________________<br>
                          Lingtyp mailing list<br>
                          <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
                          <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer noopener" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                    <br>
                    <fieldset></fieldset>
                    <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
                  </blockquote>
                  <br>
                  <pre cols="72">-- 
Martin Haspelmath
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6
D-04103 Leipzig
<a href="https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522" target="_blank">https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522</a></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>
            <br>
            <fieldset></fieldset>
            <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
          </blockquote>
          <pre cols="72">-- 
David Gil
 
Senior Scientist (Associate)
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany
 
Email: <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091</pre>
          <br>
          <fieldset></fieldset>
          <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        <pre cols="72">-- 
Martin Haspelmath
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6
D-04103 Leipzig
<a href="https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522" target="_blank">https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522</a></pre>
        <br>
        <fieldset></fieldset>
        <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
      </blockquote>
      <pre cols="72">-- 
David Gil
 
Senior Scientist (Associate)
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History
Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany
 
Email: <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>
Mobile Phone (Israel): +972-526117713
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81344082091</pre>
      <br>
      <fieldset></fieldset>
      <pre>_______________________________________________
Lingtyp mailing list
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre cols="72">-- 
Martin Haspelmath
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology
Deutscher Platz 6
D-04103 Leipzig
<a href="https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522" target="_blank">https://www.shh.mpg.de/employees/42385/25522</a></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>