In:Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology
Edited by Luca Alfieri, Giorgio Francesco Arcodia and Paolo Ramat
[Typological Studies in Language 132] 2021
► pp. 367–388
Chapter 10Verbal vs. nominal reflexive constructions
A categorial opposition?
Published online: 9 July 2021
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.10pud
https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.132.10pud
Reflexives have been extensively studied from different approaches and perspectives, but no clear consensus has been established on the criteria for their definition. From a morphological point of view, a distinction between nominal reflexives and verbal reflexives has been generally accepted in both functional and generative approaches. However, it is ultimately hard to make a precise distinction between verbal and nominal reflexives which should possibly be viewed as a continuum rather than as a discrete partition. In this paper, I will discuss the opportunity of a categorial distinction between verbal and nominal reflexive constructions, identifying some general principles which allow us to classify a form as “verbal” or “nominal”.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.The debate on “reflexives”
- 2.1The vagueness of “reflexives”
- 2.2Reflexive constructions in a typological perspective
- 2.2.1Faltz’s definition
- 2.2.2“Reflexives” as markers of coreference
- 2.2.3“Canonical” or “prototypical” reflexives
- 3.The morphology of reflexives
- 4.Verbal vs. nominal reflexives
- 4.1Definitions of “verbal” and “nominal” reflexives
- 4.2Criteria for distinguishing nominal from verbal reflexives
- 4.3Problematic cases for the distinction between verbal and nominal reflexives
- 5.Conclusions
Abbreviations Note References
References (51)
Benincà, Paola & Poletto, Cecilia. 2005. The third dimension of person features. In
Syntax and Variation. Reconciling the Biological and the Social [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 265], Leonie
Cornips & Karen P.
Corrigan
(eds), 265–299. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Comrie, Bernard. 1999. Reference-tracking: Description and explanation. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung
52: 335–346.
Corbett, Greville C.
2013. Canonical morphosyntactic features. In
Canonical Morphology and Syntax, Dunstan
Brown, Marina
Chumakina & Greville G.
Corbett
(eds.), 48–65. Oxford: OUP.
Creissels, Denis. 2002. Valence verbale et voix en tswana. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris
97(1): 371–426.
. 2007. Réflexivisation, transitivité et agent affecté. In
L’énoncé réfléchi, André
Rousseau, Didier
Bottineau & Daniel
Roulland
(eds), 83–106. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Cristofaro, Sonia. 2009. Grammatical categories and relations: Universality vs. language-specificity and construction-specificity. Language and Linguistics Compass
3(1): 441–479.
Croft, William. 2000. Parts of speech as language universals and as language-particular categories. In
Approaches to the Typology of Word classes, Petra M.
Vogel & Bernard
Comrie
(eds), 65–102. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2016. Comparative concepts and language-specific categories: Theory and practice, Linguistic Typology
20(2): 377–393.
De Benito Moreno, Carlota. 2015.
Pero se escondiamos como las ratas: Syncretism in the reflexive paradigm in Spanish and Catalan. Isogloss
1(1): 95–127.
Dik, Simon C.
1983. On the status of verbal reflexives. In
Problems in Syntax. Studies in Language, Tasmowski
Liliane & Willems
Dominique
(eds), 231–255. Dordrecht: Springer.
Dimitriadis, Alexis & Everaert, Martin. 2004. Typological perspectives on anaphora. In
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Deictic Systems and Quantification in Languages Spoken in Europe and North and Central Asia, Bernard
Comrie, Pirkko M.
Suihkonen & Valentin
Kelmakov
(eds), 51–67. Iževsk: The Udmurt State University.
Everaert, Martin. 2013. The criteria for reflexivization. In
Canonical Morphology and Syntax, Dunstan
Brown, Marina
Chumakina & Greville G.
Corbett
(eds), 190–206. Oxford: OUP.
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt. 2000a. Introduction. In
Reflexives: Forms and Functions [Typological Studies in Language 40–41], Zygmunt
Frajzyngier & Traci
Curl
(eds), vii–xv. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2000b. Domains of point of view and coreferentiality: System interaction approach to the study of reflexives. In
Reflexives: Forms and Functions [Typological Studies in Language 40], Zygmunt
Frajzyngier & Traci
Curl
(eds), 125–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Frajzyngier, Zygmunt & Shay, Erin. 2003. Explaining Language Structure through Systems Interaction [Typological Studies in Language 55]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
. 2016. The Role of Functions in Syntax: A Unified Approach to Language Theory, Description, and Typology [Typological Studies in Language 111]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Galant, Michael. 2015. Changes in valence in San Andrés Yaá Zapotec. In
Valence Changes in Zapotec. Synchrony, Diachrony, Typology [Typological Studies in Language 110], Natalie
Operstein & Aaron Huey
Sonnenschein
(eds), 213–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gast, Volker. 2006. The Grammar of Identity: Intensifiers and Reflexives in Germanic Languages. London: Routledge
Givón, Talmy & Bommelyn, Loren. 2000. The evolution of de-transitive voice in Tolowa Athabaskan. Studies in Language
24(1): 41–76.
Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. A frequentist explanation of some universals of reflexive marking. Linguistic Discovery
6(1): 40–63.
. 2012. How to compare major word-classes across the world’s languages. UCLA Working Papers in Linguistics, Theories of Everything
17: 109–130.
. Forthcoming. Comparing reflexive constructions in the world’s languages.
Heine, Bernd & Miyashita, Hiroyuki. 2008. The intersection between reflexives and reciprocals: A grammaticalization perspective. In
Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, Ekkehard
König & Volker
Gast
(eds), 169–224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Janic, Katarzyna & Puddu, Nicoletta. In preparation. Introductory paper for the workshop A comprehensive perspective on reflexive constructions, SLE, Leipzig, 21–24 August 2019.
Kazenin, Konstantin. 2001. Verbal reflexives and the middle voice. In
Language Typology and Language Universals. An International Handbook, Martin
Haspelmath, Ekkehard
König, Wulf
Oesterreicher & Wolfgang
Raible
(eds), 916–927. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kemmer, Susanne. 1993. The Middle Voice. A Typological and Diachronic Study [Typological Studies in Language 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
König, Ekkehard. 2007. Vers une nouvelle typologie des marques réfléchies. In
L’énoncé réfléchi, André
Rousseau, Didier
Bottineau & Daniel
Roulland
(eds), 107–130. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
König, Ekkehard & Gast, Volker. 2008. Reciprocity and reflexivity – Description, typology and theory. In
Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, Ekkehard
König & Volker
Gast
(eds), 1–32, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter. 2000. Intensifiers and reflexives: A typological perspective. In
Reflexives: Forms and Functions [Typological Studies in Language 40], Zygmunt
Frajzyngier, Traci S.
Curl
(eds.), 41–74. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
König, Ekkehard & Siemund, Peter (with Stephan
Töpper). 2013. Intensifiers and reflexive pronouns. In
The World Atlas of Language Structures Online, Matthews S.
Dryer & Martin
Haspelmath
(eds), Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. <[URL]> (20 February 2020).
Kulikov, Leonid. 2013. Middle and reflexive. In
The Bloomsbury Companion to Syntax, Silvia
Luraghi & Claudia
Parodi
(eds), 261–280. London: Bloomsbury.
Lazard, Gilbert. 2007. Le réfléchi est-il une voix?
In
L’énoncé réfléchi, André
Rousseau, Didier
Bottineau & Daniel
Roulland
(eds), 35–46. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Lidz, Jeffrey. 2001. The argument structure of verbal reflexives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory
19(2): 311–353.
Marlo, Michael R.
2015. Exceptional properties of the reflexive in the Bantu languages. Nordic Journal of African Studies
24(1): 1–22.
Moyse Faurie, Claire. 2008. Constructions expressing middle, reflexive and reciprocal situations in some Oceanic languages. In
Reciprocals and Reflexives: Theoretical and Typological Explorations, Ekkehard
König & Volker
Gast
(eds), 169–224. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nduku Kioko, Angelina. 1999. The syntactic status of the reciprocal and the reflexive affixes in Bantu. South African journal of African languages
19: 110–116.
Nedjalkov, Vladimir P. & Otaina, Galina A.
2013. A Syntax of the Nivkh Language. The Amur Dialect [Studies in Language Companion Series 139] Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Puddu, Nicoletta. 2010. Considerazioni di tipologia morfologica sul pronome riflessivo in greco. In
La morfologia del greco tra tipologia e diacronia, Ignazio
Putzu, Paulis
Giulio, Nieddu Gian
Franco & Cuzzolin
Pierluigi
(eds), 385–405. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
Reinhart, Tanya & Reuland, Eric. 1991. Anaphors and logophors: An argument structure perspective. In
Long Distance Anaphora, Jan
Koster & Eric
Reuland
(eds), 283–321. Cambridge: CUP.
Reinhart, Tanya & Siloni, Tal. 2005. The lexicon-syntax parameter: Reflexivization and other arity operations. Linguistic Inquiry
36(3): 389–436.
Schladt, Mathias. 2000. The typology and grammaticalization of reflexives. In
Reflexives: Forms and Functions [Typological Studies in Language 40], Zygmunt
Frajzyngier & Traci S.
Curl
(eds), 103–124, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Percillier, Michael, Yela Schauwecker, Achim Stein & Carola Trips
Lieb, Hans-Heinrich
2021. Theories of language, language comparison, and grammatical description. In Linguistic Categories, Language Description and Linguistic Typology [Typological Studies in Language, 132], ► pp. 137 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 7 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
