Interactions between High and Low Applicative in English and Kyrgyz Yusuke Yoda Toyo Gakuen University Abstract This paper investigates so-called adversity causative in apparently two distinct languages, English and Kyrgyz and claims that the relevant interpretation is induced by existence of the high-applicative projection, which introduces an argument which establishes maelfactive relation with a predicate. 1 Introduction This paper argues so-called adversity construction in English and Kyrgyz, utilizing Pylkänen’s (2000a,b, 2002, 2008) applicative approach. According to Pylkkänen, the adversity construction is yielded by the structure which is similar to an English double object construction. This paper develops her analysis with Kyrgyz data and provides several pieces of evidence that in adversity construction in both English Kyrgyz requires High Applicative projection, which forms the MALEFACTIVE relation between an affected NOM(inative) marked argument and a predicate, and moreover, both require Low Applicative projection, which introduce directionality in possession between two arguments. The organization of this paper is follows: from next sub-section, we will grasp the data and issues on the adversity causative construction in Japanese and the other two languages. In section 2, we will review the argument and proposal by Pylkkänen (2000a,b, 2002, 2008) on Applicative. Then, in section 3, we will explore English and Kyrgyz data, utilizing Pyllkänen’s approach. In section 4, concluding remarks will be given. 1.1 Passive and Causative: What are they? Japanese has two types of passive constructions, a direct passive construction and an indirect passive construction. In the following instances in (1), the a-sentence is passivized in the b-sentence with addition of passive morpheme (r)are. This type of passive constructions is called an indirect passive construction. (1) a. Sensei-ga Taro-o hinan-ta. Teacher-NOM Taro-ACC criticize-PAST. “A teacher criticized Taro.” b. Taro-ga (sensei-ni) hinan-are-ta.