Albert, Thanks very much for your explanation. I see now that I confused the state function with the f, but it's still not quite clear. data MyState a b = MyStateC ([a] -> ([a], b)) This defines an algebraic data type (...why is it called algebraic?) with two type variables and a unary constructor. instance Monad (MyState a) where return x = MyStateC (\tb -> (tb, x)) (MyStateC st) >>= f = MyStateC (\tb -> let (newtb, y) = st tb (MyStateC trans) = f y in trans newtb ) Now, if the instantiated a has type String, Int or whatever, I would understand, but the type of the Monad seems to be built up from two types. You write: ...y has type String. In more detail: in order for foo >>= toMyState to make sense, these must be the types: foo :: MyState String String st :: [String] -> ([String], String) y is forced to have type String for the sake of toMyState. But how do the two occurrences of String in the foo type, in general a and b, match to the single a in the instance declaration? In particular when I have: toMyState :: String -> MyState String Int toMyState x = MyStateC (f x) This is mapped onto a list of strings, on which the Prelude sequence is applied. sequence :: Monad m => [m a] -> m [a] You write: The >>= used by sequence is the same >>= in the MyState monad, since you instantiate m to MyState String. Therefore, sequence performs all the state transformations correctly, since >>= is correct. So the m becomes MyState String, and therefore the list elements have type (MyState String Int), or the other way around. I understand, from your explanation, how this works from there on, but I'm still confused about what the Monad is. Is it MyState which takes two types, or (MyState String) which takes one type? Or neither? Does it involve some 'sort of currying' of type parameters? Thanks again, Hans