This paper discusses whether capacity to license an internal argument and eventivity are default properties of so-called change-of-state verbs. I draw attention to the claim that, in certain languages, the causative-inchoative alternation extends to a third, external-argument-only variant with stative behavior. Productivity and systematicity raise a host of problems for current generalizations on the Causative Alternation and change-of-state verbs for various reasons, starting from the long-held claim that unique arguments of change-of-state verbs are by default internal. Insofar as the causative component is independently realized in a noneventive, nonepisodic frame, this variant challenges (a) a widely agreed rule of event composition, whereby cause, if present, causally implicates process; (b) the claim that cause(r) interpretation of the external argument is a byproduct of transitivization. The present discussion: (a) brings out a crosslanguage contrast bearing on default (cause/undergoer) interpretation of unique arguments in equipollent alternations; (b) provides new empirical data supporting the stativity of the (causative) outer v head; (c) substantiates important predictions in the literature (e.g. that verbs of causation should have stative readings; that external- argument-only variants of Object-Experiencer verbs should be found); (d) captures further verb classes allowing the alternation; and (e) shows crucial contrasts with other transitive-(in/a)transitive alternations involving null/arb objects. Aspect and determination of different (a)atransitivity alternations are central throughout.