Defining a given type of language, or furthermore comparing the types of various languages, is by no means a simple task. This is because linguistic variations are infinite, and even if patterns exist, they are equally infinite....
moreDefining a given type of language, or furthermore comparing the types of various languages, is
by no means a simple task. This is because linguistic variations are infinite, and even if patterns exist, they are equally infinite. Nevertheless, understanding the characteristics of languages from a comparative
perspective is a meaningful endeavor. Defining the typological characteristics of the few languages of the world that have not been well studied is not easy, and thus requires a special research strategy. In this
paper, I intend to compare different branches of African languages: Chadic, belonging to the Afro-Asiatic
language family; Central Sudanic, presumed to belong to the Nile-Saharan language family (though
sometimes considered a separate family); and Benue-Congo, belonging to the Niger-Kordofanian language
family. This branch is not a single language but contains countless languages within it. Therefore, rather
than covering all languages, I intend to select a few specific languages for intensive analysis and then
discuss them in comparison with other languages. Language is a very complex system (Holland 1992, Steels
2000) involving elements of vocabulary and grammar, so even for a single language, the question arises as to exactly which parts should be analyzed and compared. Traditionally, language structures have been
understood by dividing them into sound structure, word structure, and phrase structure based on vertical,
hierarchical levels, or constituent units; however, there are instances where the significance of these
distinctions is unclear because the distinctions are ambiguous or indistinct. By ascending to a higher level
through the process of abstraction and generalization of language structures, comparative concepts applicable
to all languages are derived. The predicate-argument construction is a concept generalized based on the
premise of a sentence. Based on this foundation, utterances at the pragmatic and informational levels exist
above it, while specific expression strategies at the semantic-syntactic and morphological levels appear in
individual languages below. Thus, typological comparisons are attempted under the heading of
predicate-argument construction. The next topic is the use-based linguistic approach (Langacker 2000, Bybee
2006, 2007, 2010, Diessel 2015, 2017, Kwon 2023, §3.6), which emphasizes the view that language
structure is not innately given, but rather that concrete language use, such as utterances and conversations,
is directly connected to the essence of the structure. Language learning and processing, as well as actual
communicative acts, serve as starting points for explaining the nature of language, particularly variation and
change, when viewed from various angles. Another research stream closely connected to this is constructive
grammar (Fillmore & Kay 1993; Goldberg 1995, 2006, 2019; Croft 2001; Kwon 2023, §3.5). This
perspective accepts the semiotic view that language consists of connections between signifiers and signifieds.
Furthermore, it posits that regardless of the size of the utterance, linguistic expression - that is, vocabulary,
morphemes, words, phrases, clauses, or other idioms and phrases - is used by language users as a single
unit of language processing and learning. Through communication, these units become conventionalized and
function as a single system within a given language community. This unit is covered by the term
"construction." Syntactic categories and the rules connecting them, which serve as tools for language
analysis, allow for a simple grasp of the structure of a given language, despite the weakness of simplifying
and absolutizing phenomena. However, upon closer examination, linguistic reality reveals countless instances
that cannot be explained or grasped in this manner. This is a primary concern of typology, but it also serves as a sign that variations and differences at the microscopic level must be approached from a new perspective. Network models (Buchanan 2002, Sporns et al. 2004, Baronchelli et al. 2013, Diessel 2019,
Kwon 2024, §3.2.2) are a methodology that attempts to scientifically explain ever-changing phenomena
through nodes and links. Since language is precisely this complex, dynamic system (Holland 1992,
Kauffman 1993, Steels 2000, Beckner et al. 2009), it is difficult to encompass its characteristics through a static approach. At this point, the concept of dynamic networks involving multilayered connections and access (Spitzer 1999, Newman 2003, Abramov 2011, Barabási 2016, Diessel 2020, Kwon 2025, 2025b)
becomes necessary