LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION:AUXILIATION IN EUROPE

TANIA KUTEVA

Introduction

In the cases of grammaticalization where areal factors are taken into account, linguists

usually speak of large linguistic areas such as Mesoamerica, The Amazon, the Paci®c

North-West. Particular parts of Europe have enjoyed a special privilege in the studies

of areal linguistics since in no other geographical region in the world have natural

languages so richly documented histories as the languages in Europe. Hence, it is by

no accident that the notion of a Sprachbund, as contrasted to the notion of a family of

genetically closely related languages, was ®rst applied to refer to languages in Europe,

namely the Balkan Sprachbund languages.

While Europe is the region where the Sprachbund phenomenon was ®rst recognized,

most of the comparative linguistic work on European languages has been focused on

the historical and genetic relationships between these languages. Therefore, the

Romance half of Europe, the Germanic group of languages, the Slavic languages, etc.

have been recurrent topics in the work of students of European languages.

Taking a panchronic (i.e. both synchronic and diachronic) point of view, and not

restricting ourselves to factors of genetic a�liation alone, in this study we will argue in

favour of the notion of a European Sprachbund. More precisely, we will argue that

with regard to an important part of verbal morphosyntax, namely Tense-Aspect-Mood

(TAM), it is possible to speak of Standard Average European.

Our object of investigation will be the genesis and evolution of TAM-markers, or

TAM-auxiliation, in Europe. The main claims that we will make in this study are:

(i) with regard to auxiliation, Europe is a convergent linguistic area. As such, it is

characterized by employing particular verb structures as the conceptual sources for

auxiliation;

(ii) there emerges an areal con®guration pattern with regard to the genesis of the aux-

iliation process: core vs periphery.

Language Sciences Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 289±311, 1998# 1998 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Printed in Great Britain0388-0001/98 $19.00+0.00

PII: S0388-0001(98)00005-9

Correspondence relating to this paper should be addressed to T. Kuteva, InstituÈ t fuÈ r Afrikanistik,UniversitaÈ t zu KoÈ ln, Meister-Ekkehart-Straûe 7, D-50923, KoÈ ln, Germany.Abbreviations: ACC, accusative; act., active; adj., adjective; AOR, aorist; cond., conditional; CONJ, conjunc-tive; DEF, de®nite; DIM, diminutive; D.O., direct object; fut, future; GER/ger., gerund; HAB/hab., habit-ual; IMP/imper., imperative; IMPF, imperfect; INCH, inchoative; INF/inf., in®nitive; LOC/loc., locative; M,masculine; neg., negative; NEUT, neuter; NOMIN, nominalizer; PART/part., participle; PASS/pass., passive;PERF/perf., perfect; PFV, perfective; PL, plural; PREP, preposition; PRES, present; PRET, preterite;PROG, progressive; ptcl., particle; Q, question particle; SG, singular; SUBJ, subjunctive; TOP, topic; vb,verb; VOC, vocative

289

The paper is structurally organized in the following way. Section II states explicitlyour theoretical assumptions and describes the operational tools that we will be usingin dealing with the data; section III presents the empirical results of the study; in sec-tion IV we argue in favour of uniformity in European auxiliation, and in section V anattempt is made to explain the regularities that we observe in auxiliation processes inthe languages of Europe.

Theoretical preliminaries

The methodological commitments underlying the present approach to auxiliariesand auxiliation involve an interpretation of language as an open-ended structure con-stantly interacting with external factors whereby cognitive forces play a crucial role inshaping it. Moreover, it is an interpretation of language as a dynamic process ratherthan a static product (Heine et al., 1991).

Following Heine, 1993, crucial to our understanding of auxiliaries is that they areinseparable from the process out of which they arise, i.e. auxiliation. What is meantby auxiliation is the process whereby lexical verb combinations undergo, over time,various degrees of grammaticalization into auxiliary verb structures and eventuallyinto a�xes. In other words, auxiliation relates to a continuum towards an a�xalform. In identifying a particular auxiliary structure in a particular language it is notcrucial exactly which part, strictly speaking, of that continuum is being dealt with. Theverb shifts from clitic to a�x status and while an auxiliary is, in the typical case, a sep-arate word form, there are also cases where grammarians may disagree whether itshould be described as a clitic/particle or as an a�x.

In analyzing the auxiliary structures in European languages we will be making useof the notions auxiliation developments and Basic Event Schemas.

We will be using the term auxiliation developments in order to refer to each andevery individual development of a particular structure into a particular TAM-markerin a particular language. As follows from the present understanding of auxiliaries asinseparable part of the process they arise from, namely auxiliation, the auxiliationdevelopments that we will be analyzing involve not only canonical auxiliaries, i.e.TAMÐmarkers of the type ``will come'' or ``has come'', but also a�xes which haveresulted from the process of auxiliation. At this point it has to be noted that in somecases we have historically attested developments of particular lexical morphemes turn-ing over time into particular TAMÐa�xes, whereas in others we have no reliable in-formation about the historical sources of present-day TAMÐa�xes. An example ofthe former type of case is the future in¯exion in Romance languages, cf. the su�x -oÁin the synthetic future form in

(1) Italian (Lausberg, 1962, p. 215)<canter->-oÁ`I will sing.'

where canter- is derived from the in®nitival form and -oÁ is a su�x derived from theLatin verb habeo `I have'. An example of an a�x whose origin `is buried in the depthsof Proto-Germanic or even Proto-Indo-European' (Vincent, 1987, p. 238) is theEnglish in¯exion for the past -ed.

TANIA KUTEVA290

For purposes of the present study, which lays a special emphasis on the genesis ofauxiliation, along with the verbal periphrastic constructions we have considered allcases of a�xes which can be reconstructed as deriving from a particular lexical struc-ture.

It goes without saying that approaching auxiliaries as an inseparable part of theprocess out of which they arise entails, as a natural consequence, considering linguisticexpressions which show varying degrees of grammaticalization. The di�erence ofdegree of grammaticalization involves not only the distinction between a�xes and peri-phrastic structures, i.e. canonical auxiliary constructions. The periphrastic structuresthemselves may exhibit a varying degree of auxiliation inasmuch as they may accordwith a varying cluster of characteristic features of canonical auxiliary constructionssuch as (i) change of semantics of the non-main verb, (ii) whether or not the construc-tion is used with all verbs in the language, (iii) the integration of the structure into thesystem of paradigmatic distinctions of the language, (iv) the possibility/impossibility ofusing adverbials between the auxiliary and the main verb, (v) particular facts aboutgender/number agreement between subject/object and the components of the auxiliarystructure, etc. (for a full description of the properties of auxiliaries understood as partof the auxiliation process itself, cf. Heine, 1993). Even closely related languages suchas French and Spanish can make di�erent choices with regard to the above features.Thus the Spanish perfect construction with the auxiliary haber `have' di�ers from theFrench perfect with the auxiliary avoir `have' inasmuch as the former but not the lat-ter

Ðis used with all verbs in the language. (Note that unlike Spanish, a small numberof French verbs take eÃtre `to be' rather than avoir `to have'.);

Ðshows absence of agreement between the past participle and any noun, whethersubject or object. (Again, note that unlike Spanish, in French there still exists agree-ment, even though not always respected in the spoken language).

Finally, we will be making extensive use of the notion of Basic Event Schemas.Basic Event Schemas are de®ned in Heine, 1993, p. 30 as conceptual structures which`relate to stereotyped contents describing situations that appear to be basic to humanexperience and communication and are encoded linguistically by means of predicationstypically involving one predicate and two participants'.

Heine identi®es a de®nite set of Basic Event Schemas /BES/ functioning as sourcesfor TAM-categories across languages: Location /X is at Y/, Motion /X moves to/fromY/, Action /X does Y/, Volition /X wants Y/, Change-of-state /X becomes Y/, Equation/X is (like) a Y/, Accompaniment /X is with Y/, Possession /X has Y/, Manner /X staysin a Y manner/. Three further schemas have been identi®ed as complex since in ad-dition to some of the basic schemas they contain either another schema or anotherconcept, namely Serial /X does Y (and) does Z/, Evaluative /It is X to/that Y/,Purpose /X acts (in order) to Y/. Each of these BES are illustrated in Heine, 1993, pp.27±44, therefore here we will not deal in detail with the way they serve for shaping theauxiliary structures observed in the languages of the world. We will only exemplify therole of one of the BES, namely the Location Schema, as the underlying conceptualpattern for the progressive in Ewe (Kwa, Niger-Congo). Thus in one of the progressiveconstructions in Ewe a discontinuous morpheme le . . .m is used to express a singlegrammatical function, cf.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 291

(2) Ewe (Heine, 1993, p. 121)Kof|̈ le x& tu- m .Kof|̈ PROG house build PROG`Ko® is building a house.''

Here le is a locative copula `be at', m a morpheme formally similar to the locative

postposition *me `inside', and the high ¯oating tone  over m , i.e. . . .m indicates anominalized verbal category. (In Ewe the main verb can be encoded in a nominalized

form via reduplicating the verb stem and su�xing a high ¯oating tone to the redupli-cated form.) The above progressive structure can be derived from a construction

roughly sketched as in (3):

(3) Ewe (Heine, 1993, p. 122)*KofõÂ le x& tu- tu- Â me.KofõÂ be.at house build build NOMIN inside

which in turn is structurally based on a spatial construction containing the locative

copula le and the postposition me (a typical way of expressing spatial inclusion) as in

(4) Ewe (Heine, 1993, p. 121)KofõÂ le x& me.`KofõÂ be.at house inside`Ko® is in the house'

The latter construction is the linguistic instantiation of the Location Schema /X isat Y/. In other words, the conceptual structure X is at Y can be regarded as ``showing

through'' the locative morphology (the locative copula as well as the erstwhile postpo-sition) and a nominalizing indicator (the high ¯oating tone).

Since it has been argued elsewhere (Heine et al., 1991; Heine, 1993) that auxiliation,

as part of grammaticalization, is motivated by the general tendency for humans toconceptualize abstract notions in terms of concrete notions and that what actually trig-

gers the auxiliation process is a conceptual shift, these issues will not be pursued here.

Crucial to the discussion in this paper will be the distinction between GENERAL

and SPECIFIC instantiations of BES. It has been pointed out in Heine (1993, p. 32)that there may be considerable variation in the shape that any of the BES may take in

a particular language. Thus the BES which comprise, by de®nition, conceptual struc-tures may be realized by linguistic constructions containing fairly general verbal

notions such as `be', `remain', `go', `come'. In this work we will treat such expressionsas GENERAL instantiations of BES. An example of a GENERAL instantiation of a

BES, for instance, the Action Schema, would be

(5) Bongo (C. Sudanic, Nilo-Saharan; Tucker, 1940, p. 75)ma d& nd�er�eI- do- walking`I am walking'

This example involves the development of the lexical structure do V-ing into a pro-gressive marker in Bongo, a Central Sudanic language spoken in Africa. Since no lin-

guistic item referring to an activity can be more general in meaning than the verb dowe can clearly speak of a GENERAL instantiation of the Action Schema, namely

TANIA KUTEVA292

Agent does V-ing serving as the structural template of the progressive construction inthat language.

While GENERAL instantiations of BES seem to be very persistent in the languagesof the world, there are also cases where the verbal constructions involved contain afairly great degree of lexical speci®cities. Heine (1993, p. 32) observes that the LocationSchema /X is at Y/, for instance, may be instantiated by postural verbs such as `sit',`stand' or `lie' instead of a copula verb `be', cf.

(6) Diola Fogny (Heine and Reh, 1984, p. 118)i lak& fu- riI- sit INF- eat`I was eating.'

If, in addition, we take into account the results of other comprehensive contrastivestudies of TAM-categories and their expression (see Capell, 1979; Comrie, 1976; Bybeeand Dahl, 1989; Bybee et al., 1994) we are in a position to conclude that the lattertype of instantiation of BES involves speci®c characteristics of:

(a) bodily movement in space (e.g. `walk', `run', `crawl') or bodily posture (e.g. `sit',`stand', `lie')

(b) mental or perceptual activities (e.g. `see', `think', `say', `taste')(c) directionality of movement (e.g. `towards the centre of the jungle/island')(d) socio-cultural practices (e.g. `bury').

We will treat this latter type of instantiation as SPECIFIC and will speak accordinglyof SPECIFIC instantiations of BES as contrasted to GENERAL instantiations ofBES. If we go back to the Action Schema /X does Y/, we can illustrate a SPECIFICinstantiation of that schema by means of the development of a lexical structure invol-ving a verb of a fairly speci®c socio-cultural meaning `bury'Ðinto a completive markerin present-day Cantonese, cf.

(7) Cantonese (HageÁ ge, 1993, p. 21)mai `to bury' (action vb)>verbal su�x-mai (completive).

The empirical aspect

For the purposes of the present study we examined 55 languages (as well as somedialects) of Europe, cf. Figure 1.

We identi®ed 309 cases where a particular lexical verb structure is currently develop-ing, or has already developed, into a particular TAM-marker. Our examination ofBulgarian, for instance, revealed the following individual auxiliation developments:saÏm `be' + act. past part. 4 (plu)perf./evidential; SÏte (<`want'.3SG.PRES) + mainvb 4 fut.; ima (<`have'.3SG.PRES) + da (conj.ptcl.) + main vb (PRES) 4 fut.;imam (`have') + D.O. + pass. past part 4 perf.; bix (>`be'.AOR) + act. pastpart. 4 cond.; daj (`give' (IMP) + da (conj.ptcl.) + main vb (PRES) 4 1 personimper.; nedej (<ne `not' + dejstvaj `act, do'.IMP) + da (conj.ptcl.) + main vb(PRES) 4 neg. imper. The auxiliation developments that we were able to identify inall the languages examined comprise our corpus of 309 individual auxiliation develop-ments in the languages of Europe.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 293

The sources of information we used comprise reference grammars, individual publi-cations on the subject as well as informants on some of the languages examined.

What are the overall observations that can be made on the basis of the analysis ofauxiliation in European languages? Firstly, most of the auxiliation developments thatwe were able to identify have verbal periphrasis as a morphosyntactic type of ex-pression. The following is an example of the Bulgarian periphrastic perfect or the so-called ``past inde®nite tense'' (for details regarding in¯exion vs periphrasis in the ex-pression of Bulgarian tense distinctions, see Kuteva, 1995a), cf.

(8) BulgarianVizÏ dal li si Niagarskija vodopad?see.PAST.PART Q be.2SG.PRES Niagara falls`Have you seen Niagara Falls?'

As mentioned already, some of the auxiliation developments result in a�xes. Thefollowing example from Polish in our data can illustrate this. The preterite form of averb in Modern Polish is segmentable into two parts, the stem, or the so-called l-form,and the person and number marker (Andersen, 1987, p. 31), cf.

(9) Polish (ThuÈ mmel, 1966, p. 28)myl/ -em`I washed.'

The l-form has derived from the past participle, masculine and the person and num-ber marker (-em in ex. (9) above) can be traced back to the present of the verb `be' inthe respective person and number. In other words, the Modern Polish word form my l/

em in (9) where -em is an a�x is the result of the grammaticalization of an erstwhileauxiliary construction so that what has actually happened is a reorganization of thePolish tense system which has `resulted in usage that made the present tense forms ofauxiliary BE reinterpretable as person and number markers . . . '( Andersen, 1987, p.48). Another example of an a�x as the result of auxiliation is to be found in (1)above.

Secondly, the data allow us to make the following observation about the geographi-cal distribution of auxiliation developments in Europe:

Romance Germanic Slavic Fino-Ugric Celtic Baltic

Spanish English Polish Finnish Welsh LithuanianPortuguese German Upper Sorbian Estonian Breton LatvianGalician Dutch Lower Sorbian Liv IrishCatalan Frisian Czech Karelian Scots-GaelicFrench Yiddish Slovak VepsOccitan Norwegian Russian IngrianRomansh Swedish Ukranian VodyanLadin Danish Belorussian SaameFriulian Icelandic Slovene HungarianSardinian Faroese Serbo-CroatItalian MacedonianRomanian Bulgarian

Fig. 1. Languages examined.

TANIA KUTEVA294

(i) auxiliation developments were identi®ed in ®fty-four out of ®fty-®ve Europeanlanguages and the only language where our information sources did not give usenough grounds to speak of auxiliation developments is a language on the geo-graphical fringe of Europe, namely Gagauz;

(ii) with respect to the degree to which verbal periphrasis is employed as a morpho-syntactic means of expression in auxiliation, we can observe a gradual decreasefrom South-Western Europe toward the rest of Europe, with Galician exhibitingthe most proliferous TAM verbal periphrasis.

European uniformity in auxiliation

There are at least two respects, we claim, in which one can speak of European uni-formity in auxiliation. On the one hand, our data suggest a very strong preference/dis-preference with respect to particular BES and auxiliation developments. On the otherhand, a clear regularity can be observed with regard to the type of instantiations ofBES that are employed in European auxiliation. In what follows we will elaborate inmore detail on each of these aspects.

Preferences for particular basic event schemas/auxiliation developments vs disprefer-ences/exclusion of others

European languages exhibit a particular a�nity to a particular BES, namely theEquation Schema /X is Y/. In our corpus of 309 auxiliation developments, 82 auxilia-tion developments are instantiations of the Equation Schema alone. For instance, theBulgarian perfect, which is an auxiliary construction with the verb be (cf. also (8)above), was ®rst attested in contexts involving intransitive, change-of-state verbs(Maslov, 1982, p. 260), cf.

(10) BulgarianTova e zamraÏ znalo.this.NEUT.SG be.3SG.PRES freeze.PFV.PAST.PART.NEUT`This has become frozen.'

This usage is structurally modelled on a construction with a nominal predicateinvolving either an adjective or a noun of the kind Subject is NP, i.e. on the linguisticexpression of the Equation Schema /X is Y/.

While the Equation Schema is ubiquitous in Europe, a BES such as theAccompaniment Schema /X is with Y/ is not to be found as the conceptual patternunderlying any auxiliary developments in European languages. Note that this schemacan persist in occurrence in particular geographical areas outside Europe, for instancein Southern African languages, cf.

(11) Umbundu (Bantu, Niger-Congo; Valente, 1964, p. 281)tu- li l' oku- lyawe- be with INF- eat``We're eating.''

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 295

Likewise, we can speak of particular auxiliation developments which are very usualin Europe but almost non-existent outside Europe. Let us take as an example thedevelopment have + past part.4 resultative/perfect/preterite. This development has ledto the occurrence of the Italian have-perfect construction in

(12) Italian (Salvi, 1987, p. 225)Piero ha scritto la lettera.P. has written the letter`P. has written/wrote the letter.'

The Latin ancestor of this periphrastic construction in Italian is to be found in astructure which instantiates the Possession Schema /X has Y/, cf.

(13) Latin (Salvi, 1987, p. 226)habeo epistulam scriptamhave-1sg. letter-ACC written-ACC`I have a written letter.'

Importantly, the structure of the have-perfect in Italian is only one of the numerousexamples of the have-perfect in Europe. By contrast, in non-European languages it isvery hard to come across a have-perfect.

On the other hand, a frequent auxiliation development in the languages of theworld such as ®nish + main vb4 completive/perfect/past (Bybee et al., 1994, pp. 70±71) exempli®ed in

(14) Sango (Creole of C. Africa; Samarin, 1967, p. 162)lo sõÂ gõÂ gõÂ lo tõÂ na3.s arrive outside 3.s fall with

se se, alle lo ga pendereearth suddenly 3.s come beautiful

wa le awe.woman ®nish`She came out, she fell on the ground, and behold, she had become a beautifulwoman.'

cannot be shown to relate to any of the European languages examined.Word combinations such as Spanish estoy (voy) terminando de hacer, French je ®nis

de faire, Italian ®nisco di fare, Spanish termino de hacer, Portuguese termino de fazerare not to be treated as structures that have started along the auxiliation path sincethere are neither morphosyntactic nor semantic changes to be observed in these cases.Therefore, following Coseriu, 1976, p. 106, we do not regard such combinations asverbal periphrastic constructions that are making their way in the system of grammati-cal distinctions in the TAM-domain of the verb.

Preferences for GENERAL instantiations of Basic Event Schemas

There is yet another aspect of auxiliation in European languages which justi®es thenotion of uniformity in European auxiliation. More precisely, the analysis of our corpus

TANIA KUTEVA296

of all auxiliation developments identi®ed in Europe shows that European languages

prefer GENERAL instantiations of BES, cf.

(15) be + adj./past participle 4 resultative/(plu)perfect/preterite (Equation)GermanHans ist eingeschlafen.Hans be.3SG.PRES fall.asleep.PAST.PART`Hans has fallen asleep.'

(16) go (out) (+PREP) + main vb 4 inceptive/(imminent) future (Motion)Catalan (LuÈ dtke, 1984, p. 83)ara anem a veure el segon acte`we are going to see the second act now'

(17) have (+PREP) + main vb 4 future (Purpose/Obligation)Belorussian (ThuÈ mmel, 1966, p. 34)pisac' muwrite.INF have.1SG.PRES`I will write.'

(18) have + D.O. + adj. participle 4 result./(plu)perf./preterite (Possession)

(a) Old English (Traugott, 1972, p. 94�.)Ich hñfde hine gebundene.I had him in a state of being bound.'

(b) Modern EnglishI have bound him.

(19) want + in®nitive 4 future (Volition)Serbo-Croat (ThuÈ mmel, 1966, p. 25)(ho)c u pitatiwant.1SG.PRES ask.INF`I will ask.'

(20) do + main verb 4 emphasis/`do'-periphrasis (Action)(a) Welsh (Alan King, pc)

na i ofyn i Dafydddo.PRES I ask to DavidI'll ask David.'

(b) Welsh (Alan King, pc)nes i ofyn i Dafydddid I ask to David`I asked David.'

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 297

(21) be + `after' + main vb 4 (recent) perfect (Location)Irish (Comrie, 1976, p. 106)ta im tar e is teacht isteachI-am after coming in`I have just (this moment) come in.'

(22) go + ger./vb base 4 cont./dur./progr./imperfective(Motion + Manner)Portuguese (Coseriu, 1976, p. 105)vou dizendogo.1SG.PRES speak.GER`I am speaking'

(23) go + gerundival4 continuous/durative/progressive (Manner)Albanian (Camaj, 1984, p. 149; glosses-Hans-JuÈ rgen Sasse, p.c.)ZogjteÈ janeÈ tue (duke) sjelleÈbird.PL.DEF be.3PL.PRES gerundival.particle bring.PARTkandrra neÈ c° erdhe.insect.PL in nest`The birds are bringing insects to their nest.'

(24) become/begin + main vb 4 future (Change of State)GermanWir werden das Haus renovieren.we become.1SG.PRES the house renovate`We will renovate the house.'

(25) go + and + main vb 4 durative/progressive (Serial)Swedish (Lena Ekberg, p.c.)Han gaÊ r och sjunger.he go.PRES and sing.PRES`He is singing (and walking).'

The above examples illustrate the most frequent GENERAL instantiations of BES.In most cases, however, BES have more than one GENERAL instantiation as can beseen from (26)±(35), cf.

(26) Equation Schema:be + adj/past participle4 resultative/(plu)perfect/preteritebe (usually PAST) + main vb 4 subjunctive/conjunctive/conditionalbe + main vb 4 futurebe + active past participle 4 perfect/evidentialbe + `at' + Verb/Noun 4 futuremain vb + be (SUBJ) 4 imperative

TANIA KUTEVA298

be + `to' + Verb/Noun 4 imminent futurebe ready + inf. 4 perfect(ive)remain + in®nitive/CONJ 4 imminent/inceptiveremain + main vb 4 continuative

(27) Motion Schema:go (out) + (PREP) + main vb4 inceptive/(imminent) futurego + (PREP) + main vb 4 imminent/ingressivego (PRES) + in®nitive 4 preteritego + `to' + in®nitive 4 durativecome + (PREP) + main vb 4 (imminent) futurecome + `from' + in®nitive 4 recent past (perfect)come + `to' + in®nitive 4 perfectiveleave + (PREP) + in®nitive 4 terminative/resultativearrive/reach + PREP + in®nitive 4 perfectivereturn + main vb4 (re)iterative

(28) Purpose (Obligation) Schema:have + (PREP) + main vb 4 futurehave/must (PAST/IMPERFECT) + main vb 4 subjunctive/conditional

(29) Possession Schema:have + D.O. + adjectival participle 4 resultative/(plu)perfect/preteritemain vb + have (SUBJ.)4 imperativekeep (on) + main vb 4 continuous

(30) Volition Schema:want + in®nitive 4 futurewant + main vb 4 (future-in-past) conditional

(31) The Action Schema:do + main vb 4 emphasis/`do'-periphrasisuse + main vb 4 habitualput (put oneself) + (PREP) + inf 4 inceptivetake + (PREP) + main vb 4 inceptive/futuregive + PREP + in®nitive 4 ingressivebring/carry(on) + main vb 4 cumulative/continuous

(32) Location Schema:be + `after' + main vb4 (recent) perfectbe + loc.PREP/Case + nominal 4 continuous/durative/progressive

(33) Motion Schema + The Manner Schema:go + gerund/vb base4 cont./dur./progr./actual present/imperfectivecome + main vb/gerund 4 cont./progr./cumulative(`have been doing')follow + gerund 4 continuative/progressive

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 299

(34) The Manner Schema:be + gerundival 4 continuous/durative/progressivestay/remain + main vb (IMPERFECT)4 continuous

(35) Change of State Schema:become/begin + main vb 4 futurebecome (CONJ) + main vb 4 conjunctive/conditional

(36) The Serial Schema:go + and + main vb 4 durative/progressive

Signi®cantly, the auxiliation developments that are GENERAL instantiations of BEScomprise 92, 9% of all auxiliation developments identi®ed in European languages.

By contrast, the number of auxiliation developments that comprise SPECIFIC instan-tiations is very small, 7, 1%. Of all BES it is the Serial Schema, cf. (37), as well as theManner Schema, cf. (38), that are mostly represented by SPECIFIC instantiations:

(37) The Serial Schemasit + and + main vb 4 continuous/durative/progressivestand + and + main vb 4 continuous/durative/progressivelie + and + main vb 4 continuous/durative/progressive

(38) Manner Schemastand + main vb 4 continuous/progressivelie + main vb 4 continuous/progressivesit + main vb 4 continuous/progressivehold + (PREP) + in®nitive 4 durative/progressive

We observe SPECIFIC instantiations of the Serial Schema in Swedish, cf. (39),Faroese, Norwegian, and Danish, whereas the languages where SPECIFIC instantia-tions of the Manner Schema are to be found are Swedish, cf. (40), Icelandic and Dutch,

(39) Swedtbish (Lena Ekberg, pc)Han sitter och laÈ ser.he sit.PRES and read.PRES`He is reading.' (the implication being that he is sitting while reading)

(40) Swedish (Lena Ekberg, pc)Jag haÊ ller paÊ att laÈ sa en spaÈ nnande bok.I hold.PRES on to read an exciting book`I am reading an exciting book.'

Other BES which also have SPECIFIC instantiations are the Action Schema, cf.(41), and the Motion Schema, cf. (42)

(41) The Action Schema:break (out) + (PREP) + in®nitive 4 inceptive

(42) Motion Schema:run + in®nitive 4 continuous/progressiverun + in®nitive 4 inceptive.

TANIA KUTEVA300

The Action Schema is realized by its SPECIFIC instantiation break(out) + (PREP) + inf.4 inceptive in Galician, cf. (43), Occitan and Catalan, whereasthe SPECIFIC instantiations run + inf. 4 continuous/progressive and run + inf.4 in-ceptive are to be found in Dutch, cf. (44), and Portuguese, respectively,

(43) Galician (Narumov, 1987, p. 96)botaron a correrbreak.3PL to run.INF`they started running'

(44) Dutch (Donaldson, 1981, p. 166; glosses-Johan van der Auwera, p.c.)Ik heb er-naar lopen zoekenI have there-to run.INF search.INF`I have been looking for it.'

Some of the verbs involved in the GENERAL instantiations of BES are etymologi-cally derived from verbs fairly rich in lexical meaning. For instance, the Spanish verbestar `to be somewhere, temporarily' is part of the GENERAL instantiation be + ger-und of the Manner Schema (X is/stays in a Y manner) which has provided the concep-tual source for a progressive structure in present-day Spanish, cf.

(45) Spanish (Comrie, 1976, p. 102)estoy cantando`I am singing.'

The well-attested lexical history of estar goes back to the fairly speci®c lexical mean-ing `stand' (as opposed to `sit, be seated') as the initial lexical meaning of the sourceLatin form stare `stand' (as opposed to Latin sedere, `sit, be seated'). Since, however,written documents testify to an intervening semantic change of the item initially stand-ing for a speci®c lexical notion `stand' into an item which has developed a generalmeaning, the so-called ``contingency state be'' (Comrie, 1976, p. 102), the Spanishestar + gerund structure represents a GENERAL, and not a SPECIFIC instantiationof the Manner Schema. Further examples of GENERAL instantiations of BES whichinvolve verbs whose erstwhile meaning was lexically speci®c but was generalized beforethese verbs were launched on the path of auxiliation are to be found in languages suchas Hungarian, Romanian, Russian and others.

Note that in the cases of SPECIFIC instantiations of BES we are dealing with verbsof rich lexical meaning which are not attested to have acquired additional, general lexi-cal meanings. In other words, while in the former type of case we can posit an inter-mediate stage of generalizing an erstwhile lexically speci®c meaning, in the case ofSPECIFIC instantiations of BES we are dealing with lexically speci®c structures whichare used directly to code grammatical categories.

Note also that in certain cases it is hard to determine the particular BES which anauxiliation development instantiates. In our corpus we have 22 such unclear cases ofGENERAL instantiations, cf.

(46) RussianPust' on vojdjot!pust' he come.in.3SG.PRES

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 301

`Let him come in!'

The form pust' in the above example is derived from the transitive verb pustit' ``letgo''. Thus we can speak of the change of a lexical (source) verb into an auxiliary el-ement, a change which has brought about the appearance of a particular 3rd personimperative structure in Russian. What is relevant for us here is that while it is clearthat this auxiliation development involves modality, it is not evident which BES isbeing employed in this case.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of both GENERAL and SPECIFIC instantiationsamong the BES employed in European languages. The ®rst row of Fig. 2 presents theBES, the second the absolute number of auxiliation developments that compriseGENERAL instantiations of BES and the third one the absolute number of auxilia-tion developments realizing SPECIFIC instantiations of BES.

Core vs periphery

The SPECIFIC instantiations of BES are not only statistically insigni®cant withregard to the bulk of auxiliation developments in Europe, but they are also geographi-cally peripheral in terms of areal distribution within Europe. This becomes clear if wecompare the geographical distribution of the GENERAL instantiations to the geo-graphical distribution of the SPECIFIC ones. What such a comparison shows is that:

(i) the most persistent auxiliation developments that are GENERAL instantiations ofBasic Event Schemas are dispersed geographically all throughout Europe, cf. thegeographical distribution of the auxiliation development be + (adj.)/past par-ticiple 4 resultative/(plu)perf./preterite, see Fig. 3,

(ii) the auxiliation developments that are SPECIFIC instantiations of Basic EventSchemas are only to be found in the languages spoken along the coasts (e.g.Scandinavian languages) and in the Western geographical periphery of the conti-nent, see Fig. 4.

In other words, we do not ®nd auxiliation developments that are SPECIFIC instantia-tions of BES irregularly distributed all throughout Europe. Thus we may speak ofnearly all European languages as a fairly coherent geographical group, as an unbrokenbelt, as it were, of languages which share an important characteristic regarding TAM-auxiliation, namely that the genesis of auxiliation in these languages involvesGENERAL but not SPECIFIC instantiations of BES. Hence, we conclude that it ispossible to speak of Standard Average European with regard to TAM-auxiliation inEurope.

Eq Motion Purp Poss Vol Act LocMotion+Man Man Ser

Ch- ofstate Uncl

82 39 35 32 18 18 12 14 8 4 3 22

Ð 2 Ð Ð Ð 3 Ð Ð 5 12 Ð Ð

Fig. 2. Auxiliation Developments in Europe (55 languages)(Total Number of Auxiliation Developments: 309).

TANIA KUTEVA302

European vs non-European auxiliation

How di�erent is Europe?

If we juxtapose European auxiliation to non-European auxiliation processes, willsuch a juxtaposition speak against or in favour of our proposal for Standard AverageEuropean with regard to auxiliation?

It has been mentioned in previous works that in languages outside Europe it is notonly general meaning verbs such as be, come, go that develop into auxiliaries but alsoverbs which have more speci®c or concrete meaning. Thus Capell, 1979 points outthat in the Australian language Ngamini the fairly concrete, motion verb barga `run'

Ice

Far

Sam

Kar

VepsFin

Ingr

Est

Ltv Vod

LithIr

DanFrs

Dut

BrtFr

FrlnLad

OccBsq

It

Srd

Mlt

GrmCz

PolYid

UkrSlva

Slve

BlgMed

SCr

L.Srb

Rmns

Belorus

Fig. 3. Equation Schema: be+ adj.part.4 result./pref./preterite.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 303

has developed into the auxiliary of a construction meaning `momentary action whilethe actor is moving'. In that same language another motion verb with a rather con-crete lexical meaning marga `crawl' has become a grammatical marker for `a continu-ing action while the actor is moving'.

Another example of languages where along with general verbs such as be, remain,become, come, go there are also speci®c verbs such as taste, see developing into auxili-aries, comes from the Lolo Burmese group of languages (cf. Park, 1994).

In African languages, too, we can often observe that general meaning verbs andcopulas such as do, go, be at on the one hand, and speci®c meaning verbs such as sit,stand on the other, develop into TAM-markers. Thus in a random sample of fourteenAfrican languages coming from all four major language families in Africa, namely

Occ

Ice

Far

Nor

Swd

Dan

Dut

Frs

Glc

PrtCtl

Fig. 4. Speci®c instantiations of Basic Event Schemas.

TANIA KUTEVA304

Niger-Kordofanian, Nilo-Saharan, Khoisan and Afro-Asiatic, we ®nd as many as six-

teen SPECIFIC instantiations of BES whereby each of these languages has at least one

SPECIFIC instantiation of a BES serving as the structural template of an auxiliary con-

struction. (47)±(63) exemplify these SPECIFIC instantiations. Note that since the four-

teen African languages selected here were not examined exhaustively for all auxiliation

developments that comprise SPECIFIC instantiations, it is to be expected that there are

even more examples of SPECIFIC instantiations than the ones presented below:

(47) Ewe (Niger-Kordofanian; Felix Ameka, pc)`see' + main verb 4 experiential

(48) Kanuri (Nilo-Saharan; Heine and Reh, 1984, pp. 124±125)Ein `say, think (1SG)'4 E|ª n `continuous aspect marker'

(49) Mamvu (Nilo-Saharan; Heine and Reh, 1984, p. 124)&dE `seize' 4 marker of progressive/ingressive aspect

(50) Nama (Khoisan; Hagmann, 1977, p. 74)bke i [bxa õ ] `to wake up' 4 -bke |̈ [-bxa õ ] `to do the whole night' (durative marker ofnocturnal actions)!hoa - bke õÂtalk- wake.up`to talk the whole night' (``to talk until waking up'')

(51) Yatye (Niger-Kordofanian; Stahlke, 1970, p. 65)aga `wander'4 habitual auxiliary in serial construction

(52) Egyptian Arabic (Afro-Asiatic, HageÁ ge, 1993, p. 224)?aà m `to get up' when used in the past (with gender, number and personin¯ection) 4 auxiliary expressing an inchoative meaning?om- t nim- tINCH. I- PAST sleep. I- PAST`I fell asleep.'

(53) Zulu (Niger-Kordofanian; Mkhatshwa, 1991, p. 96)-shaya `hit'4 -shaye `do completely' (terminative auxiliary)(a) Uthisha u- shaya izingane.`The teacher hits the pupils.'(b) Amahashi abu-shaye abugothula utshani.`The horses ®nished o� all the grass.'

(54) Waata dialect of Oromo (Afro-Asiatic; Stroomer, 1987, p. 149)(harka) k'wa `hold (in one's hand)' 4 continuous aspect markerutaal- ca harka k'aw- arun- NOMIN hand hold/have- 3 M.SG.PRES`he is running'

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 305

(55) More (Niger-Kordofanian; HageÁ ge, 1993, p. 221)mi `know'4 auxiliary marking habitual actions

(56) Kxoe (Khoisan; KoÈ hler, 1981, p. 530)//oe `lie, be lying'4 -//oeÁ present tense, habitual su�x (expressing an actionperformed while lying)

(57) Kikuyu (Niger-Kordofanian; Barlow, 1960, p. 268)-tuÄ uÄ ra `live,be alive, exist'4 auxiliary marking continuous, durative actions

(58) Nama (Khoisan; KroÈ nlein, 1889, p. 106, cited in Heine vs 1993; KroÈ nlein 1969,p. 109)go `look at (verb of perception and sensation)' 4 -go (su�xed particle for theimperative)Ou te tsi- go ti oà a- ro- tse, . . .give 1SG 2SG.M- IMP my son- DIM- 2SG.M.VOC`Give me, my little son, . . . '

(59) Nama (Khoisan; KroÈ nlein, 1889, p. 106, cited in Heine vs 1993, p. 142)go `look at' 4 go (recent past tense particle)ti-ta gye go !guà n- xawe-ta gye go !guà n-sa1SG TOP PAST go but-1SG TOP PAST go-astray

amaga- ta gye go oa.therefore- 1SG TOP PAST return`I went, but as I went astray, I returned.'

(60) Diola Fogny (Niger-Kordofanian; Sapir, 1965, p. 46)-lak& `sit (postural verb)' 4 past progressive auxiliaryi- lak& i- ri1SG- sit 1SG- eat`I was eating'

(61) Ngambay-Moundou (Nilo-Saharan; Heine and Reh, 1984, p. 126)a r `stand'4 progressive auxiliarym- a r m- u sa da1SG- stand 1SG- eat meat`I am eating meat.'

(62) Bemba (Niger-Kordofanian; Givo n, 1973, p. 917)-la la `sleep'4 -la a -, -le e -continuous aspect marker(a) n- kaÁ - bomba

`I will work.'(b) n- kaÁ - la a - bomba

`I will be working.'

TANIA KUTEVA306

(63) Kikuyu (Niger-Kordofanian; Mathias Schladt pc)-kora `®nd, discover, realize'4 -koruÄ o (®nd-PASS) ®nality marker (auxiliaryverb)h|¬ nd|¬ io tu- guÄ - kor- uÄ otime that 1PL-PAST- ®nd- PASStuÄ - kiny- |¬ te muÄ ci|¬1PL- arrive-PERF home`By then we had reached the village.'

Note that these SPECIFIC instantiations are geographically dispersed all through-out Africa (see Fig. 5). Such a geographical distribution does not favour a treatmentof SPECIFIC instantiations as a phenomenon which is con®ned to a particular iso-lated area within the mainland of Africa or the periphery of the continent. Rather, it

Fig. 5. Speci®c instantiations of Basic Event Schemas in Africa.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 307

is suggestive of SPECIFIC instantiations of BES as being characteristic of Africanlanguages just as GENERAL instantiations of BES are.

In other words, we can observe that

While European auxiliation involves almost exclusively GENERALinstantiations of Basic Event Schemas, auxiliation in other parts of theworld may well involve both GENERAL and SPECIFIC instantiationsof Basic Event Schemas.

(For a relevant discussion of ``non-embodied'' verbs involved in European auxilia-tion as opposed to both ``embodied'' and ``non-embodied'' ones in non-European aux-iliation, the reader is also referred to Kuteva, 1993, 1995b.)

How can this observation be explained? It is this question that we will attempt toanswer in the remainder of the paper.

Ecological vs non-ecological cultures

One possible explanation of the di�erences between European and non-Europeanauxiliation processes could involve the di�erence between Europe and particular areassuch as Africa in terms of socio-ecological practices as a factor informing the concep-tual organization of language. We have assumed here that auxiliation re¯ects the con-ceptualization and accordingly, the expression of abstract, grammatical notions suchas TAM, in terms of other, less abstract concepts involving basic human experiences(Heine et al., 1991). We could then argue that in cultures where human life involvescloser interaction with nature, such as African cultures, concrete physical character-istics of human bodily existing and acting within natural environments are of a muchgreater cognitive salience and are, accordingly, actively employed as conceptualizationvehicles of abstract concepts such as TAM. Hence the much greater role of SPECIFICor ``embodied'' instantiations of BES in African auxiliation.

Let us take, for example, the SPECIFIC (``embodied'') verbs hold in one's hand andhit in the Waata dialect of Oromo (Cushitic) and Zulu (Bantu), respectively. The for-mer verb has turned, over time, into a continuous aspect marker (Stroomer, 1987, p.149) and the latter verb -shaya `hit' has become a terminative auxiliary -shaye, in aconstruction which means `do completely'' (Mkhatshwa, 1991, p. 96). Perhaps it isonly to be expected that in cultures where language users live in closer contact withnature and where social practices are more ecologically based, it is these verbs thatwill be employed as the vehicles for conceptualizing grammatical verb distinctions. Incultures where the bond between man and nature is heavily mediated by man-madeartefacts to the extent that humans do not crucially depend on their physical abilitiesfor their everyday existence any longer, it is verbs like be, come, go expressing notionsthat are stripped bare of ``human body'' speci®cities that become the cognitive refer-ence points in terms of which grammatical categories are conceptually structured. Thebasicness and the experiential salience of one's ability to hit or hold in one's hand, orto run and crawl is much greater even after infancy, we may want to maintain, if onelives in a more natural setting than if one is a member of a technological communitywhere people, alienated from nature, are becoming more and more dependent ontransport, all kinds of machines and electronic devicesÐa fact which drasticallychanges the structure of our physical experiences.

TANIA KUTEVA308

While such a line of argument may have some explanatory appeal at ®rst sight, onlya cursory glance at the results of the present investigation su�ces to make us realizethe seriousness of at least one obvious argument against it. The argument that wehave in mind involves the fact that the 7, 1% of SPECIFIC instantiations of BES inEurope involves mostly languages which can by no means be thought of as di�eringfrom other European languages in terms of ecology of socio-cultural factors. Thus 5of all 10 SPECIFIC instantiations of BES in Europe are attested in Dutch, Danish,Norwegian and Swedish (among others) which certainly are cultures no less techno-logical than the cultures of adjacent linguistic communities.

In other words, the explanation of our observation should be sought, partly at least,somewhere else.

Auxiliation in Europe: an areal typology phenomenon

The explanation of the way European auxiliation processes arise and develop is tobe sought, we propose, in areal factors. More precisely, it is because of the geographi-cal closeness of the discourse communities in Europe and the massive linguistic andcultural communication between these communities that we observe such a uni®cationof the conceptual patterns in European auxiliation.

The insigni®cant number of SPECIFIC instantiations of BES, their geographical dis-tribution on the periphery of Europe (cf. Map 2) as well as the distinct preferences forparticular auxiliation developments and dispreferences for others, suggest a gradualisomorphism and structural convergence as far as auxiliation developments inEuropean languages appear to be the result of borrowing process. The particular arealdi�usion pattern involving SPECIFIC instantiations in some coastal languages but notin Europe-internal languages, can presumably be explained as a result of the fact thatthe geographically peripheral languages are more resistant to integrational processeswithin Europe, and are accordingly, more preserving with respect to some of theirlanguage-speci®c grammaticalization patterns.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the present results regarding auxiliation phenomena in Europe sup-port observations of other morphosyntactic parallels in the languages of Europe(Heine, 1994; Van der Auwera, forth.) and thus tend to validate the notion of aEuropean convergent linguistic area or Sprachbund where long-range interactionappears to have resulted in a relatively high degree of linguistic uniformity with regardto a number of important aspects of language structure.

AcknowledgementsÐThe author thanks the German Research Foundation for the ®nancial support for thisstudy. Part of this paper was presented jointly with Bernd Heine at the 7th International Conference onFunctional Grammar in Cordoba, Spain, September 1996.

REFERENCES

Henning A. (1987) From auxiliary to desinence. In Harris and Ramat (1987), pp. 21±52.Barlow R. A. (1960) Studies in Kikuyu Grammar and Idiom. Edinburgh: William Blackwood and Sons, Ltd.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 309

Bybee, J. and Dahl, OÈ (1989) The creation of tense and aspect in the languages of the world. Studies inLanguage 13, 51±103.

Bybee J., Perkins R. and Pagliuca W. (1994) The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect and Modality in theLanguages of the World. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.

Camaj M. (1984) Albanian Grammar with Exercises, Chrestomathy and Glossaries. Otto Harrassowitz,Wiesbaden.

Capell A. (1979) Classi®cation of verbs in Australian languages. In Wurm (1979).Comrie B. (1976) Aspect. An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems. Cambridge/

London/New York/New Rochelle/Melbourne/Sydney: Cambridge University Press.Coseriu E. (1976) Das Romanische Verbalsystem. TBL Verlag Gunter Narr: TuÈ bingen.CrochetieÁ re J-C Ouellon Boulanger et Conrad (eds) (1993) Proceedings of the XVth International Congress of

Linguists. Sainte-Foy: Les Presses de l'Universite Laval.Donaldson B. C. (1981) Dutch Reference Grammar. The Hague, The Netherlands: Martinus Nijho�.Geiger R. (1995) Reference in Multidisciplinary Perspective. Philosopical Object, Cognitive Subject,

Intersubjective Process. Hildesheim/ZuÈ rich/New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Givo n, T. (1973) The time-axis phenomenon. Language 49, 890±925.HageÁ ge C. (1993) The Language Builder: An Essay on the Human Signature in Linguistic Morphogenesis.

In Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science, 94. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: JohnBenjamins.

Hagmann R. S. (1977) Nama Hottentot Grammar. Bloomington: Indiana University.Harris M. and Ramat P. (1987) Historical Development of Auxiliaries. Berlin/New York/Amsterdam:

Mouton de Gruyter.Heine B. (1993) Auxiliaries. Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. New York/Oxford: Oxford University

Press.Heine B. (1994) Areal in¯uence on grammaticalization. In PuÈ tz (1994).Heine B., Claudi U. and HuÈ nnemeyer F. (1991) Grammaticalization: A Conceptual Framework. Chicago:

Chicago University Press.Heine B. and Reh M. (1984) Grammaticalization and Reanalysis in African Languages. Hamburg: Helmut

Buske Verlag.Heine B., GuÈ ldemann T., Kilian-Hatz C., Lessau D. A., Roberg H., Schladt M. and Stolz T. (1993)

Conceptual Shift: A Lexicon of Grammaticalization Processes in African Languages. AfrikanistischeArbeitspapiere, UniversitaÈ t zu KoÈ ln.

KoÈ hler O. (1981) La langue Kxoe. In Manessy (1981), pp. 485±555.KroÈ nlein J. G. (1889) Wortschatz der Khoi-Khoin. Berlin: Deutsche Kolonialgeselschaft.KroÈ nlein J. G. (1969) Nama WoÈrterbuch. UÈ berarbeitet und ergaÈ nzt von F. Rust. Pietermaritzburg:

University of Natal Press.Kuteva T. (1993) A cognitive approach toward grammaticalized verb constructions. In CrochetieÁ re and

Conrad (1993), pp. 95±98.Kuteva T. (1995a) Bulgarian tenses. In Thiero� (1995), pp. 195±213.Kuteva T. (1995b) The auxiliarization constraint and reference. In Geiger (1995), pp. 374±386.Lausberg H. (1962) Romanische Sprachwissenschaft. III: Berlin: de Gruyter.LuÈ dtke J. (1984) Katalanisch. Eine EinfuÈhrende Sprachbeschreibung. MuÈ nchen: Max Hueber Verlag.Manessy G. (1981) Les Langues de l'Afrique Subsaharienne. In (Les Langues dans le Monde Ancien et

Moderne, PremieÁre Partie.). Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scienti®que.Maslov J. (1982) Gramatika na baÏlgarskija ezik. So®a: Nauka i Izkustvo.Mkhatshwa S. N. L. (1991) Metaphorical extensions as a basis for grammaticalization. With special refer-

ence to Zulu auxiliary verbs. M.A. thesis. University of South Africa, Pretoria.Narumov B. P. (1987) Formirovanie romanskix literaturnyx jazykov. Sovremennyj galisijskij jazyk. Moscow:

Nauka.Park I. (1994) Grammaticalization of verbs in three Tibeto-Burman languages. Unpublished Ph.D. disser-

tation. University of Oregon.PuÈ tz M. (1994) Language Contact and Language Con¯ict. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins

Publishing Company.Salvi G. (1987) Syntactic restructuring in the evolution of Romance auxiliaries. In Harris and Ramat (1987).Samarin W. (1967) A grammar of Sango. The Hague: Mouton.Sapir J. D. (1965) A grammar of Diola Fogny. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Stahlke, H. (1970) Serial verbs. Studies in African linguistics 1 1, 60±99.Stroomer H. (1987) A comparative study of three Southern Oromo dialects in Kenya. (Kuschitische

Sprachstudien, 6). Hamburg: Buske Verlag.Thiero� R. (1995) Tense systems in European languages Volume II. (Linguistische Arbeiten). TuÈ bingen: Max

Niemeyer Verlag.

TANIA KUTEVA310

ThuÈ mmel W. (1966) Das Problem der periphrastischen Konstruktionen. Gezeigt am Beispiel des Slavischen.Wilhelm Fink Verlag: MuÈ nchen.

Traugott E. C. (1972) A history of English syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Tucker A. N. (1940) The Eastern Sudanic Languages Volume 1. London/New York: Oxford University Press.Wurm S. A. (1979) Australian Linguistic Studies. Paci®c Linguistics Series C-No 54. The Australian

National University.Valente J. F. (1964) GramaÂtika Umbundu. Lisbon: Junta de Investigacoes do Ultramar.Van der Auwera J. forth. Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe.Vincent N. (1987) The interaction of periphrasis and in¯ection: some Romance examples. In Harris and

Ramat (1987), pp. 237±256.

LARGE LINGUISTIC AREAS IN GRAMMATICALIZATION: AUXILIATION IN EUROPE 311