ABSTRACT Why do descriptive fieldwork? Dictionaries, precedence types and verb argument order Argument alternations continue to drive debate at the interface of syntax and semantics (Levin 1993, Tenny 1994, Levin and Rappaport Hovav 2005). Generally ignored in this discussion, however, is a principled understanding of the absence of argument alternation. To approach this topic, I explore the results of dictionary fieldwork on Nigeria’s Benue-Congo language Emai. In the lexical typology of Talmy (1985) championed by Nichols (1992), precedence is a narrow relation holding between verb complement elements moving object (hay) and goal (wagon) in the basic precedence construction John loaded hay onto the wagon. English allows basic as well as reversed precedence (John loaded the wagon with hay), although not necessarily for all verbs. In contrast, Emai favors basic precedence for all verbs and disallows reverse precedence: òjè óón àmè ó vbì ògó [Oje pour water CL LOC bottle] ‘Oje poured water into the bottle’ but not *òjè óón ògó àmè [Oje fill bottle water] ‘Oje poured/filled the bottle full of water’. Emai has no reversed precedence ‘fill’ verb; in fact, it has no motion domain verb that permits goal to precede moving object. Precedence effects in Emai are not confined to motion. They also affect stative constructions where one entity is located relative to another. English allows paired expressions not constrained by precedence, as in Clouds are in the sky / The sky is cloudy. Comparable expression in Emai requires basic precedence. The entity to be located (óhùú) must precede the location (òkhùnmì), as in óhùú ríì vbí òkhùnmì [clouds be LOC sky] ‘Clouds are in the sky’; reversed precedence is unacceptable (*òkhùnmì ríì vbí óhùú [sky be LOC clouds] ‘The sky is cloudy’), even with another verb (*òkhùnmì mòè óhùú [sky have clouds] ‘The sky has clouds’). Motion and location aside, strict precedence also governs Emai’s domain of causation. English allows contrasting verb pairs (kill and die) that allow the causee (John) to precede or follow the causing condition: The fever killed John and John died of fever. Emai requires strict precedence, where the causing condition (úììn) must precede the causee (òjè): úììn gbé òjè [fever kill Oje] ‘A fever killed Oje’. Even additional layering of the causing condition requires strict precedence of cause and causee: ólì èmàì ò ó rè ùíín gbè òjè [the wound SC C make fever kill Oje] ‘The wound is making the fever kill Oje’. A broad precedence constraint of the Emai type seems best interpreted with the constructs Figure and Ground (Croft 1991, Talmy 2000), Figure representing the moving, located or cause argument that precedes its counterpart Ground serving as goal, location, or causee. Strict precedence of the Emai type also provides insight into grammatical resources that are active in Benue-Congo languages, whose lack of inflectional morphology is often portrayed as syntactic deficiency (Foley and Olson 1985, Lord 1993, Crowley 2002). And the descriptive fieldwork that unearthed Emai precedence relations, although usefully characterized as a state of mind (Hyman 2001), has shown itself capable of quite tangible typological results.