Cover not available
Article published In:
Studies in Language
Vol. 47:1 (2023) ► pp.1–31

Concessive conditionals beyond Europe

A typological survey

ORCID logo | Ghent University
The present study is concerned with complex sentences known as concessive conditionals from a functional-typological perspective. It examines the coding strategies used in the protasis of the three subtypes of concessive conditionals – viz. scalar, alternative, and universal concessive conditionals – in a global sample of 17 languages, thus complementing a previous study of their formal properties in European languages (Haspelmath & König 1998). The results include some coding strategies which are unattested in European languages and suggest that Haspelmath & König’s division between languages which mark the three subtypes uniformly and languages which mark them differentially is too simplistic, there being at least four overall marking patterns rather than two. Although these results are only preliminary in nature, they do look promising for future research, which should be based on a larger and more strictly stratified sample.
Keywords: concessive conditionals, subordination, complex sentences, linguistic typology
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Language sample
  • 3.Coding strategies
    • 3.1Scalar concessive conditionals
      • 3.1.1Identical to conditional
      • 3.1.2Conditional clause plus focus particle
      • 3.1.3Specialized marker meaning ‘even if’
      • 3.1.4Connective without conditional component, also used in concessives
    • 3.2Alternative concessive conditionals
      • 3.2.1Based on conditionals
      • 3.2.2Based on (embedded) conditionals
      • 3.2.3Marked by subjunctive or optative
      • 3.2.4Marked by ‘(you) want’
      • 3.2.5Marked by an expression of irrelevance
      • 3.2.6Special connective
    • 3.3Universal concessive conditionals
      • 3.3.1Particle on or following the verb
      • 3.3.2Particle following the question word
      • 3.3.3Particle preceding the question word
      • 3.3.4Reduplication
      • 3.3.5Marked by subjunctive, conditional, or optative mood
      • 3.3.6Marked by an expression of irrelevance
      • 3.3.7No question word
  • 4.Analysis and discussion
    • 4.1Some generalizing remarks
    • 4.2Uniform and differential marking in concessive conditionals
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 14 February 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.20068.bos
References (52)
References
AnderBois, Scott. 2014. Unconditionals in Yucatec Maya. Proceedings of Form and Analysis in Mayan Linguistics 21. 1–20.Google Scholar
Berghäll, Liisa. 2015. A grammar of Mauwake. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhat, D. N. S. 2000. The indefinite-interrogative puzzle. Linguistic Typology 51. 365–400.Google Scholar
2004. Pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bisang, Walter. 1998. Adverbiality: The view from the Far East. In Johan van der Auwera (ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe, 641–812. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bystrov, Igor’ S. & Nonna V. Stankevich. 2012. Concessive constructions in Vietnamese. In Viktor S. Xrakovskij (ed.), Typology of concessive constructions, 330–343. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Ciardelli, Ivano. 2016. Lifting conditionals to inquisitive semantics. Proceedings of SALT 261, 732–752. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creissels, Denis & Pierre Sambou. 2013. Le mandinka: Phonologie, grammaire, textes. Paris: Karthala.Google Scholar
d’Avis, Franz. 2016. Satztyp als Konstruktion: Diskussion am Beispiel ‘konzessive Konditionalgefüge’. In Rita Finkbeiner & Jörg Meibauer (eds.), Satztypen und Konstruktionen, 267–295. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
De Groodt, Sarah. 2002. Reanalysis and the five problems of language change: A case study on the rise of concessive subordinating conjunctions with ob- in Early Modern German. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 55(3). 277–288.Google Scholar
Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68(1). 81–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Duffley, Patrick & Pierre Larrivée. 2020. Whatever floats your boat: A corpus-based investigation of definiteness, quantification, modality, presuppositional content, scalarity and epistemic stance with wh-ever words. International Review of Pragmatics 121. 206–245. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Forker, Diana. 2020. A grammar of Sanzhi Dargwa. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Fortescue, Michael. 1984. West Greenlandic. London: Croom.Google Scholar
Fujii, Seiko Y. 1994. A family of constructions: Japanese temo and other concessive conditionals. Berkeley Linguistics Society 201. 194–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54(3). 564–589. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel, Martin Haspelmath & Sebastian Bank. 2020. Glottolog 4.3. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. (Available online at [URL], accessed on 10/04/2021.) DOI logo
Haspelmath, Martin. 1997. Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2010. Comparative concepts and descriptive categories in crosslinguistic studies. Language 86(3). 663–687. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. & Ekkehard König. 1998. Concessive conditionals in the languages of Europe. In Johan van der Auwera (ed.), Adverbial constructions in the languages of Europe, 563–640. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hellenthal, Anneke Christine. 2010. A grammar of Sheko. Leiden: University of Leiden PhD dissertation.
Hercus, Luise A. 1982. The Bāgandji language. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
1994. A grammar of the Arabana-Wangkangurru language, Lake Eyre Basin, South Australia. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
1999. A grammar of the Wirangu language of the West Coast of South Australia. Canberra: Australian National University.Google Scholar
Hutchison, John P. 1981. The Kanuri language: A reference grammar. Madison: University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Alexander (ed.). 1996. Godoberi. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Kieviet, Paulus. 2017. A grammar of Rapa Nui. Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Kim, Minju. 2015. From choice to counter-expectation: Semantic-pragmatic connections of the Korean disjunctive, concessive, and scalar focus particle -na . Journal of Pragmatics 801. 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
König, Ekkehard. 1985. Where do concessives come from? On the development of concessive conditionals. In Jacek Fisiak (ed.), Historical semantics: Historical word-formation, 263–282. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1986. Conditionals, concessive conditionals and concessives: Areas of contrast, overlap and neutralization. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott, Alice ter Meulen, Judy Snitzer Reilly & Charles A. Ferguson (eds.), On conditionals, 229–246. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1988. Concessive connectives and concessive sentences: Cross-linguistic regularities and pragmatic principles. In John A. Hawkins (ed.), Explaining language universals, 145–166. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lehmann, Thomas. 1993. A grammar of modern Tamil. Pondicherry: PILC.Google Scholar
Leuschner, Torsten. 2006. Hypotaxis as building-site: The emergence and grammaticalization of concessive conditionals in English, German and Dutch. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
. 2008. From speech-situation evocation to hypotaxis: The case of Latin quamvis ‘although’. In Elena Seoane & María José López-Couso (eds.), Theoretical and empirical issues in grammaticalization, 231–252. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Concessive conditionals as a family of constructions. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 341. 234–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. How to do linguistics with R: Data exploration and statistical analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liljegren, Henrik. 2016. A grammar of Palula. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Menz, Astrid. 2016. Concessive conditionals in Turkish. Turkic Languages 20(1). 90–103.Google Scholar
Nasilov, Dmitrij M., Xoršid F. Isxakova & Irina A. Nevskaya. (2012). Concessive constructions in Turkic languages. In Viktor S. Xrakovskij (ed.), Typology of concessive constructions, 387–412. Munich: Lincom Europa.Google Scholar
Olguín Martínez, Jesús F. 2016. Adverbial clauses in Veracruz Huasteca Nahuatl from a functional-typological approach. Hermosillo: University of Sonora MA thesis.
Oppliger, Rahel. 2018. Whatever the specific circumstances, …: A Construction Grammar approach of wh-ever clauses in English. In Elena Seoane, Carlos Acuña-Fariña & Ignacio Palacinos-Martínez (eds.), Subordination in English: Synchronic and diachronic perspectives, 263–284. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rawlins, Kyle. 2008. Unifying if-conditionals and unconditionals. Proceedings of SALT 181. 583–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. (Un)conditionals. Nat Lang Semantics 401. 111–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rubino, Carl. 2013. Reduplication. In Matthew S. Dryer & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. (Available online at [URL], accessed on 10/04/2021.)
Sandman, Erika. 2016. A grammar of Wutun. Helsinki: University of Helsinki PhD dissertation.
Song, Jae Jung. 2018. Linguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sweetser, Eve. 1990. From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van der Voort, Hein. 2004. A grammar of Kwaza. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vander Haegen, Flor. 2019. Die Emergenz irrelevanzkonditionaler Subjunktoren des Typs egal was: Variation und Grammatikalisierung anhand des Deutschen Referenzkorpus. Germanistische Mitteilungen 45(1–2). 113–138.Google Scholar
Weber, David J. 1989. A grammar of Huallaga (Huánuco) Quechua. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Zaefferer, Dietmar. 1987. Satztypen, Satzarten, Satzmodi: Was Konditionale (auch) mit Interrogativen zu tun haben. In Jörg Meibauer (ed.), Satzmodus zwischen Grammatik und Pragmatik: Referate anläßlich der 8. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft, Heidelberg 1986, 259–285. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1991. Conditionals and unconditionals: Cross-linguistic and logical aspects. In Dietmar Zaefferer (ed.), Semantic universals and universal semantics, 210–236. Berlin: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Aubrey, Rachel & Michael Aubrey
2022. Bibliography of Conditionals. Journal of Translation 18:2 ► pp. 135 ff. DOI logo
Haegen, Flor Vander, Tom Bossuyt & Torsten Leuschner
2022. Emerging into your family of constructions. Constructions and Frames 14:1 ► pp. 150 ff. DOI logo
Nicolle, Steve
2022. Conditionals in the New Testament: Interpretation and Translation. Journal of Translation 18:2 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. 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.