In many western Austronesian languages, the fact that an agentive argument lacks full control is morphologically marked on the verb. The formatives used for this purpose are often also found on stative predicates, and it has been suggested that limited-control predicates are stative-like in that they denote the result state of a given eventuality. Here we argue that limited-control predicates differ from both stative and dynamic predicates, and constitute a category of their own. Limited-control marking primarily pertains to agentivity and not to aspectual structure, and, importantly, is only used when control is at issue. With respect to the frequent overlaps with stative morphology, we argue that historically speaking, limited-control and stative marking have a common origin. While the current investigation does not include a full account of the historical developments leading to two synchronically separate categories (stative and limited-control), we provide evidence for the hypothesis that perception predicates had a major role to play in this development.