This paper presents a principled analysis of Concealed Questions (CQs) using the Reference File Theory (RFT), a cognitive linguistic framework for understanding the meaning of noun phrases. CQs are expressions in which a noun phrase that functions as an argument of a predicate semantically corresponds to an embedded wh-question, as in “Taro knows the cause of the accident”. Analyses based on generative syntax and formal semantics, which sharply separate semantics and pragmatics and treat grammar as a purely formal system, have left unresolved three major issues: (A) the selectional restrictions on CQ predicates, (B) the nature of the noun phrases that can function as CQs, and (C) the relationship between noun phrase modification and CQ interpretation. By reinterpreting CQs as expressions whose associated varying identity (ID) within a subject’s mental representation is described by their governing predicates, this study offers cognitive linguistic answers to the above issues: (A) by enumerating seven types of CQ predicates that differ from each other in the way they describe the varying value of ID; (B) by characterizing CQ noun phrases in terms of the frame-role model proposed by Ujiie and Tanaka (2024); and (C) by clarifying how noun phrase modification tends to activate the frame-role model.

South Asia is a linguistic area, where morphological causativization is one of the prominent characteristics (Masica 1976). The anticausative is a rather less common phenomenon in South Asian languages. This study explores an analytic construction in Bengali, namely the [Nominative Subject + Participle + FALL] Construction (FALL Construction), discussing it as anticausative. This construction has not received much attention due to its idiomatic characteristics. It has been sporadically mentioned as one type of passive construction in descriptive studies of Bengali. However, this study considers this structure as a construction and describes it from morphosyntactic and semantic perspectives, especially in comparison with another commonly known passive construction employing the verb ‘become’ (the BECOME Passive Construction). This paper shows that the FALL Construction is morphosyntactically distinct from the BECOME Passive Construction regarding verbal indexing, the marking of a patient, and the existence of an agent, and that it serves as an independent construction. It is also a schematic construction with a slot in which a participle of a particular verb type can occur. Semantically, it deletes an agent from an event. Based on the present paper’s description and typological study of anticausatives, I argue that the FALL Construction is anticausative. This study suggests that investigating idiomatic and analytic constructions can shed light on the variation of voice in South Asian languages. Focusing on such constructions can also lead to discussion on the prevalence and development of FALL Constructions in South Asian languages.

This study argues that the verb expressing “to go” in the Yanagawa dialect of Fukuoka Japanese shows suppletion and clarifies the distributional environments of each root. In many Kyushu dialects, two forms of the root expressing “to go” have been reported: one containing ik and another containing itar (Yanagawa dialect: ikan/*itaran “not go”; itte/ita(t)te “go and”). Studies focusing on these forms are generally divided into those analyzing the two as synonyms and those suggesting a suppletive relationship between them. Based on descriptive data, this paper argues that these are not synonyms but are in a suppletive relationship in the Yanagawa dialect. The form containing itar appears when it is followed by suffixes historically containing -te (hereafter referred to as T-suffixes), specifically either the -te suffix or the perfective suffix -tor, or the anticipatory perfect suffix -tok. It does not appear when followed by other T-suffixes or non-T-suffixes. The forms containing ik and itar are not in a fully complementary distribution, making this an instance of “incomplete” suppletion.

This paper discusses basic features of Kove possessive constructions, and then investigates the correlations between possessive constructions and nominalized verbs. As with Proto-Oceanic and many of its other daughter languages, Kove has a rich system of possessive constructions. It makes a formal distinction between direct and indirect possessive constructions. Moreover, in the indirect constructions, two different possessive markers, a and le, are utilized. The choice of construction depends on the relation between the possessor and the possessum. Some Kove nouns can occur in the possessum position of more than one type of possessive construction with different semantics. This phenomenon appears with nominalized verbs. Any argument of a nominalized verb can be expressed as a possessor, but different possessive constructions may be chosen depending on the notional grammatical relations of the arguments. Furthermore, multiple arguments can be expressed as possessors within one clause, but with some restrictions. This paper highlights how those arguments are expressed by means of possessive constructions.