Abstract
Middle Mongolian has two similar constructions which express resultative ideas. One is AP-based, and the other Particle-based. The possible semantic relations the two constructions can express are very different, however. In particular, the AP construction may function only as a Weak resultative (in the sense of Washio (1997a)), whereas the Particle construction can express those ideas which are typically expressed by Strong resultatives. Mongolian is therefore similar to English in using the Particle construction to express a wide range of resultative ideas, but it is also similar to Japanese in that it has only Weak AP-resultatives. The existence of a language like this may shed light on some of the problems related to resultatives and language variation.
