Chapter 91: Applicative constructions

Feature information for this chapter can be found in feature 91.

1. Applicative constructions

An applicative construction is a construction with an overtly marked verb and a valency that is different from the corresponding unmarked verb (= base verb) in that there is a P argument (“direct object”) that could not be a P argument in the unmarked construction. For example, in Shuswap (spoken in British Columbia), a beneficiary that is coded like the P argument (introduced just by the determiner) can only be used when the verb has the applicative suffix -xt:

(1)
a.
m-k'úln-s
prf-make-3.sbj
ɣ
det
mim'x
basket
She made the basket.
b.
m-k'úl-xt-s
prf-make-appl-3.sbj
ɣ
det
núx̌ʷənx̌ʷ
woman
obl
mim'x
basket
She made a basket for the woman.

The P argument in the derived construction is called the applied P. The erstwhile P argument is coded with an oblique preposition in (1b), but in many languages (including Bantu languages, see below), it can keep its non-oblique coding. For applicatives in the world’s languages, see Peterson’s (2007) monograph, as well as Polinsky (2005), which is the corresponding WALS chapter.

The great majority of APiCS languages lack an applicative construction, but four languages with Bantu background have preserved applicatives from Bantu, and the mixed language Michif has an applicative construction from the Algonquian language Cree. In two languages, P status is recognized by person indexing on the verb (pre-stem in Mixed Ma’a/Mbugu, post-stem in Michif), and in the four Bantu-based languages, the P occurs in immediately postverbal position.

Applicative markers are usually considered to be verbal affixes, i.e. grammatical markers that are very closely associated with the basic verb stem. But affixal categories often have periphrastic (i.e. non-affixal) counterparts, so Creissels (2010) defines a category of “periphrastic applicatives”. These are like affixal applicatives in that an argument is treated like a P object that could not occur with the basic verb, but the applicative marker does not occur as an affix on the verb: Instead, it is a separate element deriving from the verb ‘give’. Such constructions are treated as ‘give’ serial verb constructions here (see Chapter 86). Applicatives are restricted to constructions with a marker that is never separated from the verb.

2. The values

Benefactive applicatives are the most widespread type cross-linguistically, so following Polinsky (2005), we distinguish between languages that have only benefactive applicatives (values 1-2) and languages that have other functions as well (value 3). In addition, we distinguish between applicatives that can combine only with transitive bases (value 1) and applicatives that can combine with any base verb (value 2).

Benefactive function and transitive base2
Benefactive function and any base1
Benefactive and other functions2
No applicative construction exists70
Representation:75

3. Benefactive function and transitive base

The Zulu-based pidgin Fanakalo is reported to have an applicative with transitive bases only. According to Mesthrie 2013, it is not used by less proficient speakers of the pidgin, but not only by speakers who also speak Zulu.

(2)
Theng-el-a
buy-appl-imp
mina
1sg
lo
def.art
sinkwa.
bread
Buy the bread for me.

In Michif, which has adopted its verb grammar from Cree, there is an applicative construction from Cree, using the applicative suffix -amuw:

(3)
George
George
ushipeeh-amuw-eew.
write-appl-3.sbj-3.obj
George writes for him.

4. Benefactive function and any base

In Kikongo-Kituba, the benefactive applicative can be used not only with transitive bases, but also with intransitive bases, as in (4b):

(4)
a.
Sumb-il-a
buy-appl-imp
mono
me
mukanda
book
yayi!
this
Buy me this book!
b.
Muntu
person
mene
prf
kuf-il-a
die-appl-inf
mono.
1sg
The person has died on me.

However, in (4b) the meaning is malefactive rather than benefactive. This is not so surprising, because languages often use their benefactive construction more generally, allowing also malefactive meanings (so the construction can be said to be can be said to be more generally “affactive”, cf. Zúñiga 2011).

5. Benefactive and other functions

In two of the Bantu-based languages, the applicative construction can have other semantic functions in addition to the benefactive function. In Lingala, the suffix -él can mark benefactive (5) and locative situations (6) (Meeuwis 2013):

(5)
a.
a-pon-ákí
3sg-choose-pst
elambá
cloth
He chose a cloth.
b.
a-pon-él-ákí
3sg-choose-appl-pst
ngái
1sg
elambá
cloth
He chose a cloth for me.
(6)
a.
a-fánd-ákí
3sg-sit-pst
He sat down.
b.
a-fánd-él-ákí
3sg-sit-appl-pst
kíti
chair
He sat down on a chair.

Likewise in Mixed Ma’a/Mbugu, the suffix -ya can mark benefactive (7) and locative situations (8) (Mous 2013):

(7)
ni-ne-ku-saga-ya
1sg-fut-obj.2sg-send-appl
m̩ʔo
voice
ghó
my
I'll send you my news.
(8)
vé-ne-gugulu-ya
2-fut-run-appl
hé-hospitari
16-hospital
They'll run to the hospital.

Mixed Ma’a/Mbugu has preserved the preverbal object indexes (ku- in 7) typical of Bantu languages, whereas Fanakalo (2), Kikongo-Kituba (4) and Lingala (5) use postverbal independent pronouns.

In Polinsky’s (2005) world-wide sample, this is actually the most widespread type, and languages with only benefactives are less common. Almost all Bantu languages seem to have further applicatives in addition to benefactives, though Cree only has benefactive applicatives.