Language Patterns
Recurring patterns across languages, space, and time.

Tags · Mechanism

Grammaticalization

A lexical item hardening into a grammatical marker.

Topics with this tag

Pattern

How do languages say “there is”?

“The water is in the river” takes the water as given and tells you where it is. “There is water in the river” reverses that: the river is the setting and the water is the news. Saying that something exists therefore reuses the machinery for saying where it is, and languages differ in how much they change along the way — some leave the locational predicate untouched, some add a placeholder subject, some borrow the possessive verb, and some keep a predicate for existence alone. The choice often splits by animacy and by number.

ExistenceLocationPossessionSyncretism +4
Existence
Pattern

How do languages say “I have X”?

Some languages use a transitive HAVE verb; others say “at me, X is”, “to me, X is”, or “I-with X”. The same language often switches strategy with what is possessed — inanimate, animate, kin, body-parts.

ExistenceLocationPossessionSyncretism +4
Possession
Pattern

How do languages build the paradigm of someone, anyone, no one, and everyone?

Most often these words share one interrogative base (who?) plus a small particle — “also”, “every”, “some”, “any” — that sets the reading. A few languages, English among them, lexicalise the series instead.

NegationIndefinitenessQuantificationSyncretism +4
Indefinites & Quantifiers
Pathway

How does negation rebuild itself over time?

A preverbal negator weakens and is reinforced by an extra element, often a minimizer like “step” or “thing”. The reinforcer is reanalysed as the negator itself, then weakens in turn, and the cycle starts again.

NegationNegative concordGrammaticalizationReanalysis +3
Jespersen's Cycle
Pathway

How does a word for “there is no” turn into plain “not”?

A dedicated negative existential (“there is no X”) arises beside the ordinary negator, then spreads from existential sentences into verbal negation until it becomes the standard negator itself. Croft distinguishes six synchronic types — A, A~B, B, B~C, C, C~A — and the languages below sit at different points along the drift.

ExistenceNegationSuppletionGrammaticalization +3
The Negative Existential Cycle
Pathway

How does “see” come to mean “try”?

Verbs of seeing repeatedly become markers of attempting. Japanese 食べてみる “eat and see”, Korean 먹어 보다, Mandarin 試試看, and the Turkic converb + kör- constructions all say “do it and see” for “try doing it”; Voinov (2013) traces the co-lexification across Eurasia, New Guinea, India, and West Africa.

PerceptionModalityColexificationMultiverb construction +6
From seeing to trying

More in this facet

Language Patterns — PoC. Cross-linguistic typology and diachrony. Seed data is illustrative; sources to be added.
Content licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0. Attribute as “Language Patterns (languagepatterns.org)”.
Sister sites: The Graveyard of /p/