| Halkomelem | P-oblique | Even though antipassives are syntactically intransitive, they nevertheless have a patient, and thus they are semantically transitive. The patient can be omitted or appear as an oblique-marked noun phrase (Gerdts & Hukari 2006: 64). |
| Halkomelem | P-elimination | Both antipassives express non-specific, de-individualized patients or avoid expressing a patient (Gerdts and Hukari 2000: 6). |
| Warrungu (Greater Maric) | P-oblique | transitive ERG(A) ACC(O)
antipassive-(a): NOM (d-S) ERG Vt-gali-ZERO
antipassive-(b): NOM (d-S) D.AT Vt-gali-ZERO
antipassive-(c): NOM (d-S) GEN Vt-gali-ZERO
antipassive-(d): NOM (d-S) ACC Vt-gali-ZERO
(Tsunoda 2011: 427) |
| Warrungu (Greater Maric) | P-elimination | Antipassives sometimes describe habit, tendency, nature, propensity, inclination, job, etc. The undergoer appears to be always generic or non-specific. Possibly due to its generic or non-specific meaning, the undergoer NP is sometimes absent (Tsunoda 2011: 499). |
| Mapudungun | P-incorporation | Finally, as further evidence of the discourse role of NI in Mapudungun, we observe that incorporated nouns can introduce new discourse referents to which subsequent nominal expressions can refer back (Baker et al. 2005: 146).
FYI: We observe the same in Mojeño Trinitario (KJ). |
| Mapudungun | P-elimination | It is not surprising that all possibilities can be elicited (SV, VS, AVO, VAO, VOA, OVA, and AOV, where S refers to the single argument of an intransitive verb, A to the actor, and O to the object of a transitive verb) (Zuninga 2000: 63). |
| Comanche | P-incorporation | A transitive verb may be made intransitive by incorporating an object (Charney 1993: 203).
Incorporated nouns have the effect of detransitivizing a transitive verb. They are found fairly often in Comanche and are generally used to describe habitual activities (Charney 1993: 123).
FYI: Comanche, a Stage I language, incorporates patients of transitives and of intransitives, as well as locations (Mithun 1984: 875). |
| Comanche | P-elimination | Obligatorily unexpressed P:
FYI: The language has the indefinite object prefixes: ma- and ti- that can function as a voice marker. Ma- is typically used with human implicit P, and ti- is used typically with nonhuman implicit P. See Charney (1993: 128). @ In Zuninga & Kittila (2019: 105), Comanche is discussed under patientless or suppressing antipassive (KJ).
P -omitted:
When an object is not present but is implied, the indefinite object prefix ma- or ti- are used. If the clause has no overt subject, but one is logically is present, and if the object (if present) is not in subjective form, the indefinite subject prefix ta= (Charney 1993: 126).
9. (Charney 1993: 136)
[tatɨtsahkɨnaʔetɨ nɨɨ]
ta=-tɨtsaHkɨna-ʔe-tɨ= nɨɨ
indf=subj-sew-ʔe-gen:asp I
‘I sew.’ (spoken by someone who sews habitually)
|
| Basque | P-oblique | The P argument occurs as a direct object in the transitive clause. Still, it is demoted to an oblique in the LCA (lexically constrained antipassive), which appears in the instrumental or comitative (Zúñiga & Fernández 2021: 630).
MT: The P argument occurs as a direct object in the transitive clause but is demoted to an oblique in the LCA (lexically constrained antipassive) (Zúñiga & Fernández 2021: 630). |
| Basque | P-elimination | Semantically, neither low individuation nor low affectedness of P seems to appropriately describe what triggers the Basque alternation; generic or non-specific P arguments are routinely expressed via omission from the clause. (...) Remembering, mocking, or enjoying something is marked in the absolutive versus the instrumental /comitative (...) (Zúñiga & Fernández 2021: 636).
FYI: Basque has two classes of intransitive verbs differing in the coding they assign to the core nominal term of their construction: a) The mirror (abs) has fallen down.’ vs. b) ‘The water (erg) has boiled.’ (Creissels 2021: 27). |
| Chukchi | P-incorporation | The process of Object Incorporation applies at the clause structure level. This accounts probably for the ability of certain verbs to form both non-incorporative and incorporative AP's (Kozinky et al. 1988: 660-661).
See also Kozinky et al. (1988: 653, 660-662). |
| Chukchi | P-oblique | The surface oblique object can be in the dative, locative, or instrumental (Kozinsky et al. 1988: 665). |
| Chukchi | P-elimination | Some antipassives obligatorily require a surface OBL object (...). It is the probability of the AP's co-occurrence with ZERO existential (@omitted P) that is important. The following examples are arranged according to the increase in the 'surface oblique object demand' (Kozinsky et al. 1988: 670).
The ability to cooccur with ZERO existential OBJ varies from verb to verb, being probably due to semantic factors, not ultimately clear as yet. It seems possible to predict the absolute ANTI for verbs that denote in minimal contexts an activity /accomplishment with a uniform goal and known trivial result (this, naturally, does not exclude non-trivial results); further, the possible objects of the action denoted are not ranked or differentiated necessarily with regard to the action property (Kozinsky et al. 1988: 670). |
| Mam | P-incorporation | Object incorporation (...) requires the use of the antipassive with a limited set of non-specific (generic) objects which accompany certain verbs (England 1983: 218).
The other instance in which the patient is expressed directly rather than obliquely is in the object incorporation function of the antipassive, which is discussed below. In this construction, the patient is both obligatory and expressed directly (England 1983: 213).
An interesting feature of the antipassive of incorporation in Southern Mam is that if there is an enclitic associated with the person marker on the verb, it will occur after the incorporated noun (which is always non-specific) (England 2017: 522).
Here (@incorporation), the patient is always expressed in a direct noun phrase, and the verb cross-references the agent absolutively. No cross-referencing of the patient is possible (England 1988: 534).
|
| Mam | P-oblique | Patients, if expressed, are relegated to an oblique phrase (England 1983: 211).
The suffix -n has the syntactic function of deriving an intransitive verb from a transitive stem whereby the original agent (only) is cross-referenced by the absolutive markers on the verb and the original patient if it appears, is in an oblique phrase (England 1983: 110).
The agentive antipassive can express a patient (both indirectly and directly) (England 1983: 214, 221).
FYI: It could be argued that some examples of the absolutive antipassive include a patient. On closer inspection, however, sentences such as (7-82), (7-83), (7-84) (agentive antipassive) involve agent promotion in that they are used to answer a question about the agent and are, therefore not examples of the absolutive antipassive (England 1983: 214). @In Dyiari the antipassive also serves to ask the question about the Agent (KJ).
|
| Mam | P-elimination | In Mam, a Mayan language (England 1983b, 1988), the antipassive construction is obligatory when the o is unidentified. The object must be unknown, implied, or non-specific and may not be explicitly referred to in the clause (Cooreman 1994: 52).
Propositions with two main participants are inherently more transitive than propositions with only one since there can be no transfer of an activity in the latter. The antipassive, which indicates a lower degree of identifiability for the o, often deletes this referent as well (sometimes obligatorily as in Mam and Tzutujil) (Cooreman 1994: 56).
The absolutive use of the antipassive cannot include an expressed patient in either a direct or an oblique noun phrase (England 1983: 214).
Further by definition the absolutive antipassive should preclude an expressed patient (England 1983: 214). |
| Bezhta | P-oblique | According to van den Berg (2003), most verbs preserve the P argument (but demote it to an oblique). The remaining verbs delete P, and only a handful allow both demotions to oblique and deletion (Comrie et al. 2021: 526).
Van den Berg (2003) notes that with six verbs in Bezhta that allow for P deletion or demotion to oblique, the presence vs. absence of the demoted P has significant repercussions on the meaning of the construction (Comrie et al. 2021: 529).
@Coding decision: we focus only on the verbs that preserve the adjunct P because they constitute ""majority.""
Expression of the P of the transitive construction as an oblique with the antipassive is possible (Comrie et al. 2021: 552).
P of the transitive either corresponding to an oblique in the intransitive or is omitted (Comrie et al. 2021: 516).
Formally, the antipassive is related to the basic voice as follows: a) the verb is intransitive (detransitivized), b) the A of the basic voice is S of the antipassive
c) the P of the basic voice is OBL of the antipassive or omitted (Comrie & Khalilova 2015: 1). |
| Bezhta | P-elimination | According to van den Berg (2003), the majority of the verbs preserve the P argument (but demote it to an oblique). The remaining verbs delete P, only a handful of verbs allow for both demotion to oblique and deletion (Comrie et al. 2021: 526).
|
| Niuean (Eastern Malayo-Polynesian) | P-incorporation | Pseudo Noun Incorporation (PNI) (Massam 2001: 157).
Massam (2001) describes a construction under the label: pseudo noun incorporation. This construction is different from complete noun incorporation “wherein a nominal head is incorporated into a verbal head”. In the pseudo noun incorporation, there is only a partial detransitivization process,
and nominal objects can occur with modifiers or grammatical morphemes (Moyse-Faurie 2021: 158).
Seiter (1980: 69) has the section ""noun incorporation"".
FYI: In this paper, a distinction is made between NI, wherein a nominal head is incorporated into a verbal head (...), and PNI, which involves a less radical, partial detransitivization process (Massam 2001: 154). |
| Niuean (Eastern Malayo-Polynesian) | P-oblique | Many verbs govern either middle or ergative case marking (Seiter 1979: 33).
Several syntactic rules (...) will be seen to treat middle and incompletive objects like other ki/ke he and i/he NPs, and unlike absolutive direct objects. From this I will argue that Niuean middle objects and incompletive objects are syntactically oblique (Seiter 1979: 34).
Oblique NPs, including stative agents and middle objects (Seiter 1979: 95).
In Niuean (302), the A takes the ergative and the P takes the absolutive in the high-transitivity clause (...). This contrasts with the low-transitivity clause in (b), where the A takes the absolutive and the P takes the oblique (Zuninga & Kittila 2019: 190).
The participant expressed as the P term of the transitive construction is expressed as an oblique (Creissels 2021: 524-525).
|
| Niuean (Eastern Malayo-Polynesian) | P-elimination | FYI: Massam (2020: 115) distinguishes the null generic object, incorporation object, and ""middle, incompletitve"" object.
There are also cognate objects which can be left unexpressed (Massam 2020: 119-120).
The other main type of implicit argument is found with unergative verbs, and Niuean also exhibits such verbs (laugh, pray, dance). It is well known that such verbs can optionally take objects, in particular, cognate objects (Massam 2020: 119-120). |
| Central Alaskan Yupik | P-oblique | Unidentifiable (indefinite) semantic patients must be cast as obliques. In Yup'ik, the oblique category used for this purpose is the ablative (Mithun 2000: 94). |
| Central Alaskan Yupik | P-elimination | Yup'ik also contains several devices for eliminating semantic patients from the set of core arguments of the clause, a function often termed ‘antipassive’. A reduction in valency may be accomplished by inflection alone (Mithun 2000: 93). |
| West Greenlandic | P-incorporation | One significant variety of denominal,
verb-forming suffix produces predicates in which the incorporated noun is understood as the object of the verb encoded by the suffix (Sadock 1980: 306). |
| West Greenlandic | P-oblique | It is still possible to indicate external objects in the half-transitive construction by using the instrumental case (Fortescue 1984: 86).
The antipassive suffixes make a transitive verb intransitive by forming a stem that takes what would be the absolutive term of the transitive as an optional instrumental complement (Sadock 2003: 52).
Heaton (2017: 462): patientless oblique.
'‘He killed (something)"" / ""He is a murderer."" : only subject agreement may refer to an indefinite, unspecified object or even be interpreted as having no object reference at all (Schmidt 2003: 395).
@FYI: Full noun phrases (subject and object) are always optional. Personal pronouns are generally only used for particular emphasis (Fortescue 1984: 82).
|
| West Greenlandic | P-elimination | |
| Cavineña | P-oblique | Exchange of auxiliaries:
With transitive non-inflecting verbs, an antipassive derivation is achieved by exchanging the transitive auxiliary a- ‘affect’ for the intransitive auxiliary ju- 'be'. (...), the underlying O can be overtly expressed, although this is not obligatory. Typically, the O is incorporated in the non-inflecting verb. In at least one example, the underlying O is not incorporated but is instead expressed as an oblique (associative) phrase. In many cases, however, the underlying O is left unexpressed (Guillaume 2008: 282-283).
FYI: In a few cases, the (passive) suffix -ta(na) has idiosyncratic meanings, as when it is used with the pair of transitive verbs jipe- ‘approach O, move close to O’ and jaka- ‘abandon O, move away from O’. With these verbs, the suffix has an antipassive effect: the underlying A, rather than the O, becomes the S, and the underlying O is demoted to an optional ablative postpositional phrase (Guillaume 2008: 263). |
| Cavineña | P-elimination | Patientless antipassive: (Guillaume 2008: 274-276).
Reduplication:
It is impossible to express the notional object as a core argument or as an oblique (Guillaume 2014: 329).
Reduplication:
The underlying O referent cannot be expressed, but it is still understood as part of the semantics of the event (Guillaume 2008: 282). |
| Abau | P-incorporation | ‘Noun incorporation in Abau is indicated by the juxtaposition of an unmarked object NP with a verb.’
(Lock 2011: 114)
|
| Chamorro (-) | P-oblique | P marked adjunct:
The antipassive is a syntactically intransitive construction in which the Object has been placed in an oblique position (Cooreman 1988: 571).
P marked adjunct:
This argument is not realized as the direct object but instead is implicit—not syntactically realized at all—or else realized as an oblique (Chung 2020: 227).
P unmarked adjunct:
Most antipassives used by native speakers introduce indefinite Objects (@unflagged P), which can be deleted under certain circumstances (Cooreman 1988: 571). |
| Chamorro (-) | P-elimination | The interpretation of the antipassive as emphasizing the activity expressed in the predicate provides a nice link between the Demoting and Indefinite Antipassive. It is evident that when the Activity itself is emphasized, and as a result, the importance of the Object decreases, one can quickly leave out the Object (Cooreman 1988: 586).
This argument is not realized as the direct object but instead is implicit - not syntactically realized at all - or else realized as an oblique (the antipassive oblique) (Chung 2020: 227). |
| Nez Percé | P-oblique | NPs are morphologically unmarked in the antipassive construction (Rude 1988: 559).
There is no ergative case marked with -n(i)m and no direct object case marker with -ne, both agent and patient NPs being unmarked (Rude 1986: 129).
In the antipassive construction neither agent nor patient are ever case marked (Rude 1985: 86). |
| Soninke | P-incorporation | Object incorporation detransitivizes transitive verbs. Syntactically, all the mechanisms sensitive to transitivity unambiguously show that object incorporation yields intransitive compound verbs, and this is consistent with the fact that (...) object incorporation triggers detransitivization marking (Creissels 2021: 309-310).
Possessive incorporation and oblique incorporation do not modify the transitivity properties of verbs. By contrast, object incorporation detransitivizes transitive verbs (Creissels 2021: 310).
|
| Soninke | P-oblique | Antipassive constructions in which the patientive argument is expressed as an oblique are possible, at least with some verbs (Creissels 2021: 307).
Antipassive constructions with the patientive argument expressed as an oblique are, however, rare in spontaneous discourse and do not seem to be possible with all verbs (Creissels 2021: 307).
Antipassive constructions with the P argument expressed as an oblique are only attested with antipassive forms derived by means of the detransitivizing suffix -i, never with antipassive forms derived by means of the dedicated antipassive suffix (Creissels 2021: 307).
|
| Soninke | P-elimination | A-labile verb whose intransitive construction has an unspecified object reading (Creissels 2021: 301).
FYI:
Constraints on the expression of the object (Creissles 2021: 300).
With transitive verbs whose patientive argument is a discursively salient entity, antipassive constructions are impossible, and the use of object pronouns are obligatory (Creissels 2021: 307).
In Soninke, transitive verbs whose patientive argument is a discursively salient entity (speech act participant or previously introduced participant) cannot occur in an antipassive construction (Creissels 2021: 306).
The frequency of antipassive constructions in Soninke is entirely due to their use as a strategy making it possible to use transitive verbs without specifying their patientive argument (Creissels 2021: 306).
|
| Belhare | P-incorporation | The construction does not alter the grammatical relation of the P-argument (the object) (...). The object-downgrading construction alters the categorial status of objects from the usual NP level to a bare noun. As such, the object cannot contain attributes, demonstratives, or any marking that could imply a specific determiner value such as possessive or number: the constituent must have a generic kind reading (Bickel 2017: 707).
The categorial downgrading and the associated semantics suggest similarity to noun incorporation, but a downgraded object is not limited to the immediately preverbal position, and it can be modified by focus clitics (...). Unlike the perfect passive, the object-downgraded version of perfect forms does not substitute the transitive marker - sa by the intransitive marker - ŋa (...); the object-downgrading construction affects only agreement and case morphology (Bickel 2017: 707).
BUT
These data also call into question an alternative analysis of the constructions in terms of compounding (). Incorporation is also an unlikely option because all inflectional material (prefixes, suffixes) surrounds the verb stem alone. In none of the languages surveyed, here is the detransitivized object inserted inside the inflectional word (Bickel 2011: 5).
Belhare does not allow modification of the object in the detransitivized construction. Thus, a detransitivized object lacks the phrase-structural properties of a full-fledged NP (Bickel 2011: 2).
In some languages, the detransitivized object is obligatorily present (Puma), in others it can be dropped (Chintang, Belhare); in some languages, the object is a full-fledged NP (Puma, Chintang), in others it is a bare noun that cannot be modified (Limbu, Belhare) (Bickle 2011: 6).
Belhare does not allow object modification in the detransitivized construction. Thus, a detransitivized object lacks the phrase-structural properties of a full-fledged NP (Bickel 2011: 2-3).
FYI: In Belhare (...) it is possible to drop the detransitivized objects, given a suitable context (Bickel 2011: 3).
FYI: the object argument loses some of the properties that it normally has in regular transitive clauses: (...) in some languages (such as in Belhare) it can no longer be extended by modifiers (Bickel & Gaenszle 2015: 67). |
| Japhug | P-incorporation | Incorporation is the last morphological means of suppressing the patient in Japhug (Jacques 2012a: 200).
Noun incorporation can affect verbal transitivity. We commonly find examples of incorporation in which a transitive verb becomes intransitive. The incorporated noun corresponds to the patient-like argument of the base verb and saturates its place in the argument structure (Jacques 2021a: 433).
When the verb incorporates the patient of the original verb (...), the incorporated verb becomes intransitive: this is a case of saturating incorporation (Jacques 2012a: 220).
It is a saturating incorporation, which removes the object from the argument structure of the verb: incorporating verbs of this type are all intransitive. In contrast, their base verbs are all transitive (Jacques 2021b: 1076). |
| Japhug | P-oblique | 1b) A-ambitransitivity with a marked P-adjunct:
In (37a: ‘One of them rode it.’), the agent is marked with the ergative. The patient is not overt, but the transitive a- prefix on the verb and the presence of ergative case indicate that the verb is to be interpreted as transitive: the patient is definite (it refers to a tiger mistakenly stolen by three thieves) (Jacques 2012a: 219).
In (37b: ‘The boy rode on her.’), the subject ‘the boy’ does not bear ergative case, and the verb must be interpreted as intransitive (...). ‘on her’ is an adjunct and does not participate in the verb’s argument structure (Jacques 2012a: 2018-219).
1b) A-ambitransitivity with an unmarked P-adjunct:
A handful of intransitive verbs have an unmarked second argument, which is not indexed on the verb but is relativized in the same way as P arguments. I refer to such verbs as ‘semi-transitives’ and their second argument as ‘semi-object’ (Jacques 2019: 121).
FYI: three groups can be distinguished: plain labile, labile with oblique arguments, and labile with semi-object (Jacques 2021b: 589).
|
| Japhug | P-elimination | 1) Derived verb:
The object affected by the rɤ- derivation is not only demoted morphologically but also removed syntactically, and verbs with the antipassive prefix cannot take an overt patient corresponding to the object of the base verb, even as semi-object or with an oblique case (Jacques 2021b: 931).
1) Derived verb:
The antipassive is not simply a means of changing the case marking of the Agent from Ergative to Absolutive: it involves a change in valency, with the result that the original patient can no longer be expressed (Jacques 2012a: 215).
2) Plain Labile verb:
The lability (observed in these two examples) is agent-preserving: the agent of the transitive verb, and not the patient, remains when the verb is used intransitively (Jacques 2012a: 2018).
2) Plain Labile verb:
While transitive and intransitive verbs can be easily distinguished on formal grounds (...), a small class of verbs can be either transitive or intransitive (Jacques 2012a: 219).
FYI: Patients can be suppressed using four distinct constructions generic, antipassive, lability, and incorporation (Jacques 2012a: 221).
FYI: Three groups can be distinguished:
(a) plain labile,
(b) labile with oblique arguments,
(c) labile with semi-object,
(Jacques 2021b: 589). We consider here (b-c) (KJ). |
| Mojeño Trinitario | P-incorporation | (N)oun incorporation has various effects on valency (no valency change, valency increase or decrease) (notes from Françoise Rose ms: 1).
The complex verb stems made of a verb root and an incorporated noun seem to generally share the prosodic, phonological and morphological behavior of simple verb roots (notes from Françoise Rose ms: 37).
|
| Mojeño Trinitario | P-oblique | Antipassive with demotion of P as an oblique, as in (34) (the verb echijiriko ‘speak to’ normally takes the addressee as the object, but in (34) the addressee is encoded in a prepositional phrase, in what is called a discontinuous reciprocal construction) (Rose 2023: 782). |
| Mojeño Trinitario | P-elimination | P omission
Mojeño Trinitario shows A-preserving lability, also called agentive ambitransitivity: the same root can be used without any formal change either transitively with both A and P, or intransitively with a unique S participant (with S being semantically equivalent to A) (Rose 2023: 770). |
| Gaahmg | P-elimination | When a verb is marked as having no object, it attaches the antipassive suffix -An, which precedes other morphemes (Stritz 2012: 173).
The antipassive decreases the valency by omitting the patient, and in this way “detransitivizing” the transitive clause to one core argument (Stritz 2014: 263).
The patient is deleted in the antipassive (see ex. 53, 55). This is unlike Shilluk, where the patient is merely demoted to an oblique, but similar to Päri, where the patient can be deleted (Stritz 2014: 261).
(Stritz 2012: 215)
The clitic is only attested with transitive verbs, and can be used when the clause has no patient or theme, as in the antipassive clause.
(Striztz 2012: 203)
When a speaker uses a transitive verb and wants to indicate that an implied object is unknown or is intentionally not mentioned, he or she does so by attaching the antipassive suffix -An to the verb root. |
| Humburi Senni | P-elimination | An unspecified-object antipassive, the theme NP (patient) being omitted (Heath 2014: 281).
For most verbs, this derivative can be used either as a resultative passive, with the agent omitted, or as an unspecified-object antipassive, the theme NP (patient) being omitted (Heath 2014: 281). |
| Washo | P-elimination | ?um- intransitivizing prefix (Jacobsen 1964: 542).
?um- Intransitivizing emphasizes the action rather than the goal and w- static adds an idea of indefiniteness to either the actor or the goal (Jacobsen 1964: 529).
The derivational prefix be- Indefinite Object is added to transitive and intransitive verb stems, forming intransitive verb stems in either case (Jacobsen 1964: 547).
The commonly occurring Static prefix w- is added to both intransitive and transitive verb stems, the resultant forms being intransitive verb stems in either case (Jacobsen 1964: 540).
|
| Nivaĉle | P-elimination | A voice/valency mechanism that resembles antipassives in the sense that it suppresses the participant encoded as the P of a transitive stem (Vidal & Payne D. 2021: 350).
Vanka- constructions formed on transitive bases do not allow overt expression of the P (Vidal & Payne D. 2021: 365).
The Nivaĉle vanka- construction is of the type that omits the base P (Vidal & Pane D. 2021: 359).
the understood patient is semantically non-specific and is syntactically suppressed. Example (43b) shows that the simple vanka- construction does not allow the erstwhile P to occur overtly in the clause; nor can it occur in an oblique phrase (but this is to be expected as the language does not have syntactically oblique non-temporal phrases) (Vidal & Pane D. 2021: 359). |
| Eastern Yiddish | P-oblique | (Luchina 2023: 20)
a.
ven du varf-st im zakh-n vet er
when 2sg throw-prs.2sg 3sg.m.dat thing-pl.acc aux.prs.3sg 3sg.m
zey tsurik-breng-en
3pl back-bring-fut
‘(And) when you throw him things, he would bring them back.’
b.
Er, nosn shloyme, varf-t zikh mit gelt
3sg.m Nathan Shlomo throw-prs.3sg refl with money
‘He, Nathan Shlomo, splashes out money.’
FYI: (a) is the transitive structure, whereas (b) is intransitive. In (a) the object ""thing"" is in the accusative case, whereas there is realized as P adjunct in (b). The peripheral status is signaled by the adposition ‘mit’ (see Luchina 2023: 20).
|
| Eastern Yiddish | P-elimination | P suppression:
Luchina 2023: 10)
a.
Der hunt hot zikh aleyn gebisn
def.m dog aux.prs.3sg self foc bite.pst
‘The dog bit itself.’
b.
?der hunt hot zikh gebisn
def.m dog aux.prs.3sg self bite.pst
‘The dog bit itself.’
‘The dig bites.’
P omission:
Er leyent oft.
'He reads often.'
*Er hot opgegesn.
'He ate'.
*In the past tense, a perfectivizing prefix might be preferred, though not obligatory (personal communication with Elena Luchina, 20.04.23).
|
| Kalamang | P-incorporation | Only objects can be incorporated in Kalamang, and incorporated objects are recognized by their lack of object marking and the fact that the compound is treated as one phonological word (Visser 2022: 261).
There are two processes of verb derivation: noun-to-verb derivation by reduplication and noun incorporation (Visser 2022: 45).
Incorporation can take place on verbs that are part of a complex predicate. Both the first and the the second verb in such a construction may incorporate (Visser 2022: 262).
For Kalamang, there are two diagnostics to determine whether or not a noun is incorporated: prosody and object marking. Incorporated nouns form a prosodic unit together with the verb, such that stress is assigned on the incorporation construction (i.e. the verb with incorporated noun). In a clause with a non-incorporated noun followed by a verb each has its own stress. The other diagnostic is object marking. Incorporated nouns lack object marking, indicating that they are no longer an argument in the clause (Viser 2022: 125).
In Kalamang, noun incorporation is defined by the absence of an object marker on the incorporated noun in combination with a phonological criterion (Olthof et al. 2020: 21).
|
| Kalamang | P-elimination | P suppression:
The verbal reciprocal proclitic nau= may have an antipassive use (Visser 2022: 271). See ex. (52):
P suppression:
In Kalamang, reciprocal constructions are made with a verbal proclitic nau=. In these constructions, the valency of the verb is typically reduced by one such that there is only a subject argument (Visser 2022: 269).
A-AMBITRANSITIVITY:
While most verbs are either transitive or intransitive, there are also a number of ambitranstive verbs. In all of them, the transitive subject corresponds to the intransitive subject. Ambitransitive verbs include directional verbs like bara ‘descend’; ingestion verbs like na ‘to consume’, muap ‘to eat’ and kosom ‘to smoke’; and perception verbs like kome ‘to see; to look’ (Visser 2022: 285).
' |
| Georgian | P-elimination | P suppression:
'One thing that becomes clear is that the object argument is absorbed in Example 4.4.24a–d and the subject argument is an agent rather than a theme (as it is in unergatives)' (Amirdze 2006: 174-175).
P suppression:
Type II: deponents are almost always intransitive, with backgrounding of the direct object. In this respect, Modern Georgian morphosyntax shares some features with the ‘primary-object language’ type proposed by Dryer (1986) and Blansitt (1984). Such languages are characterized by morphosyntactic operations which treat notional indirect objects, and the notional direct objects of verbs that lack indirect objects, as a distinct grammatical relation (‘primary object’) (Tuite 2006: 8).
P omission:
The Transitive Class includes some verbs which are not today construed with any external direct object (e.g. bav3v-ma mo-(?0-)3ard-a ‘the baby urinated’, mo+lar+e-m a-(?0-)i-xed-a ‘the cashier looked up’). At some stage in the history of the language these verbs will have been associated with a direct object, which over time was dropped because of its predictability (Hewitt 1995: 217). |
| Yakut | P-oblique | This meaning is attested in the derivatives of several verbs (@the contact locative verbs) of manual physical actions involving a relatively long physical contact to keep balance, a posture, or contact between agent and a (fixed) object, etc. See (179) in which P argument is in ablative (Nedjalkov & Nedjalkov 2007: 1101).
(Nedjalkov & Nedjalkov 2007: 1142)
Kini aan -ttan ǝl-ǝs-t-a.
He door handle-abl take-rec-past-3sg
He took hold of the door handle.
|
| Yakut | P-elimination | The absolutive meaning: In this case, the surface object is deleted (Nedjalkov & Nedjalkov 2007: 1101).
I will mention only one of such meanings, namely, the meaning known as “antipassive”, “depatientive”, “absolutive”. In this
case the predicate, while generally retaining its meaning, loses its object (Nedjalkov 2006: 18).
|
| Udmurt | P-oblique | Deaccusative subjective reflexives: these are reflexive verbs with DO demotion to OblO (hence the label deaccusative) (Geniušienė 1987 94).
Deaccusative reflexive verbs in Udmurt (Geniušienė 1987 318). |
| Udmurt | P-elimination | 1) 'Absolute' reflexive verbs in which the RM (reflexive marker) marks a ban on Patient expression occur in a limited number of languages (Geniušienė1987: 314).
2) Udmut also has labile verbs where A=S and the omitted P receives the unspecified interpretation (KJ). |
| Ket | P-incorporation | The direct object of a transitive verb, which is coded externally and co-indexed by /b/ in P3 (@position/slot 3) is put right after the leftmost actant-coding morpheme of the verb (P8) - that is, it is physically and symbolically ""incorporated"" into the verbal morpheme chain (Georg 2007: 236).
|
| Ket | P-oblique | When the bound morpheme [us] ‘a little bit’ is incorporated in a verb, the object loses the index on a verb. Hence, [us] incorporation has detransitivization effects, at least at the level of P indexation.
(Vajda 2015: 655).
FYI: We consider the resulting construction with the absolutive P in P demotion as a P adjunct (KJ).
|
| Ket | P-elimination | P omission
1) Ket (Yeniseian; Valentina Romanenkova, Southern Ket speaker, born 1946, elicited by Edward Vajda, May 17, 2023)
a.
Ūk tīˑp de’ŋ da=hɯld-aŋ-a.
Your dog people she=bites-them
‘Your dog bites people’
b.
Ūk tīˑp da=araŋɢoɣavet
Your dog she=bites
‘Your dog bites.’
2) Ket (Yeniseian; Valentina Romanenkova, Southern Ket speaker, born 1946, elicited by Edward Vajda, May 17, 2023)
De’ŋ d-assʌnnoɣavet-in
people they hunt
‘People engage in hunting’
- intransitive stem, ‘SBJ hunts’, can’t be used with an object to say exactly what they hunt.
- To add what people hunt, you incorporate the animal word into the verb (p.c. Edward Vajda, May 17, 2023).
FYI: The language does not have lability but Ambitransitivity: √qo ""to die, kill"", where some roots may be called semantically ""labile"". Whether the transitive or the intransitive meaning is actuated is determined by the conjugational pattern of a given verb. See Georg (2007: 217) (KJ). ""Nor does the language have labile verbs (Vajda 2015: 666).""
FYI: While an object noun phrase can be dropped from the verb clause in discourse, its presence remains indexed by the logically appropriate agreement marker verb internally. There are no morphologically distinct deobjective forms in Ket (Vajda 2015: 653). @FYI: deobjective understood as verb-coded alternation.
FYI: Subject and object noun phrases are often dropped to background referents in discourse, and the basic SOV word order can be varied to convey other nuances of information structure (Vajda 2015: 630). |
| Kolyma Yukaghir | P-oblique | The suffixes -d’(e)-, -de:
There are examples where the detransitivizer can occur with an oblique. It seems that -d’(e)-, and -de can yield P adjunct type demotion with the possibility of omitting P adjunct rather than being obligatory unexpressed P (MT).
The suffixes -d’(e)-, -de:
Examples (12a, 357b, 711b, 715a, 734a, 305a) from Maslova (2003) are instances of P adjunct demotion (MT). |
| Kolyma Yukaghir | P-elimination | P suppression:
The iterative suffix -(n)d’i-: Being applied to a transitive verb, this suffix involves, in addition, detransitivization (by elimination of the direct object)’ (Maslova 2003: 197).
|
| Abkhaz | P-elimination | P omission:
There is a small class of labile verbs which may function either as transitives or intransitives. There are two types, differing by whether the sole argument of the intransitive variant corresponds to the subject or the direct object of the transitive variant. In the first case, which resembles a conative alternation (61), the intransitive variant describes the process itself, while the transitive variant focuses on the object (O'Herin 2020: 480).
P omission:
If we regard the transitive construction as the primary one, then the corresponding intransitive constructions of the type s-3ax-wa-:Jt' 'I am (busy with) sewing' would resemble the de-transitivizing mechanism with a-demotion known as anti-passive derivation (...). However, it is difficult to say which of the constructions (transitive or intransitive) should be seen as basic (Chirikba 2003: 51). (KJ)
FYI: Unlike other Caucasian languages, Abkhaz does not have such mechanisms as antipassive or anticausative derivation (Chirikba 2013: 50).
|
| Sierra Popoluca | P-incorporation | 'Incorporation is productive in SP'
(De Jong Boudreault 2009: 513).
|
| Sierra Popoluca | P-elimination | Sierra Popoluca has an antipassive construction in which a transitive verb is marked with the suffix -ɁoɁy. In antipassive sentences, transitivity is reduced, and the patient is suppressed (De Jong Boudreault 2009: 509).
|
| Ainu | P-incorporation | Both O-incorporation and antipassivization are valency-decreasing (Bugaeva 2021: 221).
Ainu possesses several coded valency-changing alternations (....) and noun incorporation (of P and non-agentive S/A) (Bugaeva 2015: 811).
The antipassive construction in Ainu, which entails the omission of object NP, is functionally close to noun incorporation. Both are backgrounding processes, and
indeed there are examples in the corpus that are interchangeable (Bugaeva 2021: 225). |
| Ainu | P-elimination | A syntactic expression of the object is blocked by the antipassive marker i- (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 530).
The antipassive prefix i- decreases verbal valency; the original object is obligatorily omitted (Bugaeva 2021: 218).
(A)ntipassives from 2-argument verbs result in 1-argument verbs, and the original object is obligatorily omitted (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 528).
The derivational antipassive marker i- ‘person/thing’ can be regarded as an antipassive marker per se based on its syntactic (eliminating a patient/theme/recipient argument), semantic (denoting an unspecified, generic participant or lexicalizing it to a single or subset of objects) and discourse (patient-defocusing) properties (Bugaeva 2021: 213).
(A)ntipassives from 2-argument verbs result in 1-argument verbs, and the original object is obligatorily omitted (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 528). |
| Latvian | P-oblique | Deaccusative subjective reflexives:
These are RVs (reflexive verbs) with DO (direct object) demotion to OblO (oblique object) (hence the label deaccusative)
(Geniušienė 1987: 94).
Verbal constructions felt to be related to deobjectives may also fail to eliminate the object from argument structure while at the same time demoting it morphosyntactically (Holvoet 2017: 71).
A deaccusative reflexive is originally a deobjective reflexive expanded with an oblique object. (Holvoet 2020: 271). |
| Latvian | P-elimination | Δ1
Anim1 Anim2
Ag Pt
S DO
Δ2
Anim1 Anim2
Ag Pt
S Ø
The diathesis shift in 'absolute' RVs is identical to that in 'partitive' RVs as it consists in blocking the expression of (Anim2 = Pt)
(Geniušienė 1987: 83).
As mentioned above, deobjectives are antipassives that eliminate the object rather than just demoting it by assigning it oblique marking. (Holvoet 2017: 65). |
| Murle | P-elimination | Most Murle verbs take the same form in both transitive and intransitive clauses (...). Many verbs can be used only in the transitive, while other verbs take the same forms in both transitive and intransitive clauses. However, there are a number of verbs which take an intransitive marker. These are often the more commonly used verbs (...). When a clause contains an object, these verbs take the normal transitive form, but when there is no object, these verbs add the intransitive marker (Arensen 1982: 84).
The intransitive clause core contains an obligatory predicate slot filled by a verb and an obligatory subject slot filled by a noun phrase, pronoun, or person marker affixed to a verb. Some transitive verbs must take an intransitive marker when they are used in an intransitive clause (Arensen 1982: 108).
|
| Gumuz | P-incorporation | Certain body part terms have grammaticalized as a variety of other morphosyntactic categories, in particular as relator nouns, verbal classifiers, and class morphemes, the final two of which are noun categorization devices. Many of these same body part terms can be incorporated into the verb or form part of lexicalized verb-noun compounds (Ahland 2012: v) (KJ).
Depending on the verb, the valence of a transitive verbal root may or may not change when a noun is incorporated. Some verbs maintain their valence, while others may decrease in valence (Ahland 2010: 171).
Focus will also be on the following nominal roots/suffixes: (...) ‘eye/seed’, ‘ear’, which in certain verbs exhibit a classificatory function (Ahland 2010: 160).
FYI: 'Subject pronominal marking on the verb is possibly the most compelling piece of evidence that an incorporated element is not an argument of the verb. Bound pronominals in S intransitive role carry tonal marking that is distinct from those in A role' (Ahland 2012: 288).
FYI: ‘When a conjugated verb is marked as transitive (whether the lexical root itself is a labile or transitive root), it is unacceptable to utter the clause without an overt P argument [...]. If an Incorporated noun/Classifier (IN/CL) is part of the verb stem and is coreferential with a P argument, the P argument need not be overtly expressed' (Ahland 2012: 341). |
| Gumuz | P-oblique | FYI: Another function of certain INC/CLF morphemes is that of reducing the valence of a verb. The bound incorporated noun /-(a)go(a)/ ‘place’ functions as a valence reducer for certain transitive verb roots (Ahland 2012: 189) (KJ).
(Ahland 2012: 190)
a.
d-ókó-wíɗ ɓaga
AFF-1PL.INCL.TR-see person
‘We saw someone.’
b.
d-á-wír-é-gw ká=nɗea
AFF-3SG.INTR-see-TWRD-PLACE DAT=ground
‘He looked toward the ground.’
|
| Gumuz | P-elimination | P suppression (voice):
'the /a-/ prefix also functions as a valence reducer without necessarily producing a reciprocal meaning. [...]. When /a-/ is added, the meaning is the same but the verb stem no longer takes an O argument.' (Ahland 2012: 194).
|
| Moloko | P-incorporation | Friesen & Mamalis (2008) identified a unique group of verb constructions in Moloko. In these constructions, a special, sometimes phonologically reduced noun form that represents a part of the body is incorporated into the verb phrase (Friesen et al. 2017: 293).
The body-part noun follows directly after all other elements in the verb complex. It appears to be in the same position as any other noun phrase direct object in the verb phrase (see Chapter 8); however it is in more tightly bound to the verb complex than a noun phrase. The body-part noun does not fill the do pronominal
slot, because verbal extensions that follow the do pronominal in the Moloko verb complex precede the body-part (Friesen et al. 2017: 295).
However, the incorporated noun is grammatically closer to the verb complex than a noun phrase direct object would be because the body part can never be separated
from the verb complex. The body-part can never be fronted in the clause (Friesen et al. 2017: 296). |
| Moloko | P-elimination | P omission:
The second feature is that most Moloko verbs are ambitransitive – the same verb with the same morphology may occur in clauses that are bitransitive, transitive, or intransitive (Friesen et al 2017: 273).
P omission:
Most Moloko verbs are ambitransitive (i.e., labile) in that they can occur in intransitive, transitive, and sometimes bitransitive clauses with no morphological change in the verb complex (except of course, the addition of the appropriate pronominals) (Friesen et al 2017: 275).
P omission:
There are two semantic possibilities for intransitive clauses of Group 4 verbs in the Perfective aspect. The subject can be the semantic Agent or the semantic Theme (Friesen et al. 2017: 286).
P omission:
The semantics of transitive and bitransitive clauses is uniform for these verbs – the subject always expresses a semantic Agent, and the direct object always expresses a semantic Theme. Intransitive clauses are more flexible because the subject can express either Agent or Theme for some verbs (Friesen et al. 2017: 281).
FYI: Moloko has a flexible valence system that allows variations in the transitivity of a given verb with no morphological marking (Friesen et al. 2017: 257).
FYI: In Moloko, valence-changing operations are not achieved through morphological modifications of the verb (e.g. with causative, applicative, and passive affixes). Transitivity is a clause-level property that carries a grammatical function (Friesen et al. 2017: 177). |
| Maa | P-elimination | P suppression:
Maa (...) has an antipassive construction marked by the verb suffix -ɪshɔ(r). This suffix turns an otherwise transitive construction into an intransitive one that can no longer express the P (Payne D. 2021: 447).
P suppression:
(S)yntactically, -ɪshɔ(r) is a valence-reducing operation that triggers omission of the P argument of an otherwise transitive stem (Payne D. 2021: 456).
P suppression:
For transitive roots with <agent theme> argument structure, the theme cannot be expressed in the -ɪshɔ(r) construction (Payne D. 2021: 455).
FYI: Labile:
The vast majority of Maa verb roots are lexicalized as intransitive, transitive or ditransitive. Few roots are labile (Payne D. 2021: 449).
FYI: ""In short answer to your question about a habitual reading when there is no overt P noun phrase to an otherwise transitive verb, the answer is “no”. I have really not/hardly encountered that. In my view, the vast majority of Maa verb roots (and stems) are lexicalized as intransitive, transitive or ditranisitive (that is, there is hardly any lability). A zero-form object of an intransitive verb (root or stem) is interpreted as a “definite null” in Fillmore’s sense; and such a clause does not give rise to a habitual reading"" (p.c. with Doris Payne, 23 January 2024).. |
| Mocoví | P-oblique | The object can be fully omitted, encoded by a less-definite noun, or oblique-marked by ke- (Juárez 2023: 169).
- aɢan marker:
the valency modifier -aɢan can
be viewed as a general activity marker that highlights both the activity expressed by the base verb and the subject argument that is responsible for it. Such functions imply that the derived constructions are also associated with a backgrounding process with regards to the base construction. The P argument is demoted (deleted or oblique-marked) in the antipassive (Juárez & Gonzalez 2021: 331).
-(a)ɢan marker:
Not all instances of antipassive -(a)ɢan constructions in Mocoví are associated with the deletion of P. Indeed, it is possible to have antipassive constructions in which P is expressed. In these cases, the encoding of the P argument differs from its encoding in the prototypical transitive clause (Juárez & Álvarez González 2017: 240).
-(a)ɢan marker:
it is possible to have antipassive constructions in which P is expressed. In these cases the encoding of the P argument differs from its encoding in the prototypical transitive clause (...). (c)ompared to the transitive construction exemplified in (14a) and to the antipassive exemplified in (13b), the patient argument is still present in these antipassive constructions but itis encoded without any nominal classifier. This is contrary to what happens in (14a) where the P argument is introduced by the nominal classifier [so] (Juárez & Gonzalez 2017: 240-241).
-(a)ɢan marker:
‘There are other instances of antipassives in which the P nominal expression is accepted but its coding differs from P nominals in typical transitive clauses' (Juárez & Gonzalez 2021: 326).
|
| Mocoví | P-elimination | -(a)taɢan marker:
Another interesting difference between both antipassive markers is that the antipassive construction marked by -(a)taɢan does not present the possibility to express P because P is always deleted in the derived -(a)taɢan antipassive construction (Juárez & Gonzalez 2017: 247).
-ɢan marker:
Since this detransitivized construction calls for a non-definite object argument, it naturally follows that its syntactic expression is ruled out when it corresponds to an individual and unique entity. This is illustrated in (151), where the expression of the first person singular object argument jim creates an ungrammatical clause when the verb is ɢan-marked (Juárez 2023: 170).
-ɢan marker:
Similarly, when the object argument corresponds to a third-person singular object argument, the ɢan-modified predicate cannot occur with that argument. The object argument that is part of transitive clause in (152a) can not be expressed with the derived predicate in (152c)(Juárez 2023: 170-171). |
| Tima | P-elimination | P suppression:
In Tima, the suffix '-Vk' on verb stems is considered as a derivational marker which indicates the omission of the object in transitive verb roots (Mubarak 2009: 234).
P suppression:
The antipassive suffix is highly predictable. If the transitive verb does not take an object, the antipassive suffix '-Vk' is used instead (Mubarak 2009: 234).
P omission:
(Dimmendaal 2009: 346)
a)
ƞ́-kʌ́lùk (kɨ́dʌ̀) káɓʊ̀h kùllʌ́
1SG-eat 1SG meat yesterday
‘I ate (some) meat yesterday’
b)
ɲ̀-cʌ́-ƞ́-kʌ̀lùk kɨ́dʌ̀ tʌ̂m
PROG-1SG-eat 1SG much
‘I am eating a lot’
According to Payne (1997), a language can classify verbs according to their transitivity, i.e. either transitive verbs which take an object as an obligatory constituent, intransitive verbs which do not take an object, ditransitive verbs which take two objects (direct and indirect object) or ambitransitive verbs which can be constructed with or without the object. The same is true of Tima (Mubarak 2009: 212).
|
| Ngarla (South-West Pama-Nyungan) | P-elimination | P suppression:
FYI: Only one language in Australia has a patientless antipassive (Ngarla) (Heaton 2017: 217).
P suppression:
FYI: Ngarla appears to lack a syntactic pivot and in Foley’s (2007) terminology thus has a backgrounding antipassive (Westerlund 2015: 68).
|
| Kuku Yalanji (Yimidhirr-Yalanji-Yidinic) | P-oblique | The antipassive in Kuku Yalanji is used productively for what may be called a 'generalized action' (...). This means that the described action is not discrete and is performed on some general or 'non-individuated' object which may or may not be stated in surface structure (Patz 2002: 152). |
| Kuku Yalanji (Yimidhirr-Yalanji-Yidinic) | P-elimination | P omission: (Patz 2002: 153)
Bama dunga-ny bunjurri-ny.
Aborigine.ABS(S) go-PST throw.spit/curse-PST
‘The Aborigine went and threw a curse.’
As in other Australian languages, there is a strict division between transitive and intransitive verbs in Kuku Yalanji. The most basic criterion for distinguishing these grammatical classes is the case inflection on the subject noun occurring with a verb: only a transitive verb can co-occur with a noun in Ergative case while an intransitive verb requires a subject noun in Absolutive case (Patz 2002: 88).
Kuku Yalanji distinguishes strictly between tranSItive and intransitive verbs. An
intransitive verb requires only a noun phrase in subject function, which can be either a pronoun in nominative case or a nominal in absolutive case (Patz 2002: 121). |
| Worrorra | P-oblique | ‘When a nominal object is to be indexed on a formally object-demoting verb classifier, it is
accomplished by NSC (=non-subcategorized object) object suffixes [...]; the nominal objects of these predicates are indexed in DAT position’ (Clendon 2014: 332).
|
| Worrorra | P-elimination | ‘In the absence of any token specific to the effected actor (ie, of some kind of reciprocal anaphor) these constructions are patientless antipassives, in that the objects from their active equivalents are unstated but understood. Unlike the object-demoting constructions (...), these are morphological antipassives, as the presence of their dedicated middle-voice morpheme indicates.’ (Clendon 2014: 411) |
| Bininj Gun-Wok | P-elimination | FYI: Based on Evans (2003: 441), the reflexive/reciprocal suffix -rr may also have the absolute antipassive. See footnote 20 (KJ).
Footnote 20:
Of course, the situational context determines whether the predicate is self-converse or not. Both ‘kiss’ and ‘fuck’ can be used non-reciprocally precisely when the action is not being actively reciprocated or is not so portrayed, exactly as in the difference between English ‘she kissed him’ and ‘they kissed’ (Evans 2003: 441).
|
| Diyari (Karnic) | P-incorporation | Pseudo-incorporation:
1a) In languages without overt object marking (e.g. Diyari, an ergative language with unmarked absolutives), additional diagnostics are required to distinguish direct objects from NPs under PNI. Diyari has a general detransitivizing suffix -ṯadi that forms reflexives and antipassives (...). In a subclass of verbs (Austin’s class 2C), both the logical subject and the logical object of the antipassive seem to be in the absolutive form, with SOV word order (Polinsky 2017: 378).
1b) Example (16):
Significant differences exist between the (apparent) absolutive objects in (16a,b). While the object in (16a) can be separated from the verb and scrambled, the object position in (16b) is fixed. (16a) answers the question, “Who ate the meat?”, whereas (16b) answers, “What is the man doing?” (...). The nominal demonstrative may be adjectival; the NP+verb unit seems syntactically inseparable, yet does not form a lexical item. This suggests that in (16b), the object is not absolutive, but a caseless PNI object—which explains its immobility (Polinsky 2017: 378).
The class 2C of verbs:
A -> S,
P -> O
thayi- ‘to eat’ (Austin 2013: 78)
Pseudo-incorporation (2C):
Added to a class 2C transitive verb, -tharri- derives an intranstive stem which can appear with an object complement. It indicates that the action is carried out on an unspecified object. There are five class 2C roots (Austin 2013: 82). |
| Diyari (Karnic) | P-oblique | P adjunct (class 2B):
The affix -tharri- is used in Diyari to mark a syntactic process that relates the following pair of sentences where the verb is of class 2B. The noun phrase of the transitive clause corresponds to the S NP of the derived intransitive clause, while the P NP is replaced by an NP in the locative case (Austin 2013: 160).
P adjunct (class 2B):
Added to a class 2B transitive root, -tharri- derives an intransitive stem which is syntactically an anti-passive. There are eight 2B verbs (Austin 2013 82).
|
| Alawa | P-oblique | 'The transitive action state battery includes verb roots which may occur with an object as referent, or (with the same auxiliary stem) with an object as the purpose when the action has not attained its goal; the object may be absent' (Sharpe 1972: 103).
These alternations are semantically parallel
to those between ERG-ABS 'see, look at, or, find', 'watch', 'catch', etc. and ANTI ABS-DAT or ABS-GEN 'look for', 'watch for', 'feel for', etc. in Warrungu (...) Alawa (Sharpe 1972:102-03) and Kalkatungu
(Blake 1977:17) (Tsunoda 1988: 627-628). |
| Alawa | P-elimination | (Sharpe 1972: 103)
a.
lilmi-ři yaŋ ka-ya-kan-na da yaŋan.
man-ERG hit he-with-did-it CNJ snake
‘The man hit the snake over and over.’
b.
lilmi yaŋ-ŋuwal.
man.ABS hit-ACT
‘The man is always hitting.’
ACT- active suffix |
| Panare | P-oblique | Some evidence that this is primarily a subject (A) focus construction is that the A always precedes the verb, while the O may or may not be specific and may or may not be expressed. If expressed, the O invariably follows the verb and takes no case marker or postposition (Payne T. & Payne D. 2013: 326).
There are other contexts in which the de-ergative construction has at least three characteristics of antipassives It is often used when the O of an inferential perfect/participle semantically transitive verb is non-specific or otherwise relatively unimportant in the current discourse scene, and the O argument is easily omitted (Payne T. & Payne D. 2013: 329). |
| Panare | P-elimination | P suppression:
General Detransitivization: Vs-, V’:
There are four such prefixes, largely lexicalized in terms of what roots they may occur with, and their effects vary according to the root they are attached to and the construction in which they appear. In most cases, detransitivization is achieved by “merging” A and O (reflexive and reciprocal) or eliminating the A argument from the scene (passive and middle voice). These derivations we simply term detransitivization (Payne T. & Payne D. 2013: 179-180). @ Vs-, V’: show antipassive use (KJ).
(Payne T. & Payne D. 2013: 108)
Anan-ich-ireema-yaj ta (...)
1EXC-DTR-feed-PPERF1 here (...)
‘We ate here (...).' |
| Gooniyandi | P-oblique | ""A nominal expression realizing the Goal participant in a middle clause [...], or the Affected participant in a clause of another transitivity type is marked by -yoo DAT"" (McGregor 1990: 180).
|
| Gooniyandi | P-elimination | (McGregor 1990: 321)
nganyi mila-ngir-i
I.ABS see-PRES/(1SG)N+CLSF
‘I am looking.’
FYI: classifier-i is only for intransitives (KS).
|
| Lavukaleve | P-oblique | FYI: For Lavukaleve, the core/oblique distinction is a simple one: subject and object are core; everything else is oblique (Terrill 2003: 231).
Based on the examples provided by Angela Terrill in personal communication (30.06.23), the P argument may occur as an oblique. This is signaled by [-na] 'in' (KJ). |
| Lavukaleve | P-elimination | Ambitransitive verbs can take either one or two arguments, with no overt valency-changing morpheme to mark the change of transitivity (though the appearance of object affixation makes the transitivity clear) (Terrill 2003: 45).
Ambitransitive verbs are those verbs which can function either transitively or intransitively with no overt morphological affixation to show the change in transitivity. (...). Of these, there are two kinds. There are those verbs for which the subject of the intransitive form of the verb corresponds in semantic role to the subject of the transitive form of the verb and there are those in which the subject of the intransitive form corresponds to the object of the transitive form (Terrill 2003: 46). |
| Makalero | P-oblique | Conatives with locative isi-complements (Oblipatient construction):
In a relatively rare construction type, an undergoer to a transitive verb is moved from the more usual object slot into acomplement verb phrase with the general locative verb isi’. This construction has been found to convey a conative notion (Huber 2011: 342) (KJ).
This conative construction corresponds neatly to Goldberg’s (1995: 4) conative argument structure construction, which she paraphrases as “X directs action at Y” (Huber 2011: 343) (KJ).
FYI: the undergoers to these verbs stand within a verbal complement with isi-, the reduced form of the general locative verb isi’ (Huber 2011: 147).
FYI: Verbs express their undergoer participants not in the form of an object argument, but within a verbal complement (KJ).
See Table 3.11: Verbs with locative undergoers (Huber 2011: 147). |
| Makalero | P-elimination | Objectless sentence:
In such a case, (@ The effect of the use of a transitive verbal complement to -ini ‘do' (BD) (BD=bound form) the undergoer is, in a manner of speaking, removed from the event. The resulting whole does not refer to an event with a specific undergoer but only to the action itself in a general way (Huber 2011: 341).
FYI: BD stands for the bound form: In Makalero a sizeable group of verbs exhibit special bound forms if they are part of a complement-verb complex (Huber 2011: 131) (KJ). |
| Oksapmin | P-oblique | 'Rarely, a verb with the middle prefix takes an apparent object' (Loughnane 2009: 240)
(Loughnane 2009: 141)
gəxən nənəp=nəp mox ox samin xəx
later elder.brother.1/3POSS=VERY ANPH 3sm wild.pig find
t-x-m=o li-m s-n-gop=li
MID-MAKE-SEQ=QUOT say-SEQ go-PFV-VIS.FP.SG=REP
‘The older brother went to hunt for wild pigs.’
|
| Oksapmin | P-elimination | P omission:
su-ti-p
kill-PFV-PER.FP.SG
‘(He/she/it) killed (something/someone).’
(Loughnane 2009: 272)
|
| Savosavo | P-elimination | P suppression:
The detransitivizing suffix -za derives intransitive verb stems from some transitive and ambitransitive verb stems that index objects only using suffixes. (...). There are three possibilities. One is: the subject is unchanged and only the object is removed (Wegener 2012: 171).
P omission:
AMBITRANSITIVE verb stems can occur either with or without object marking (Wegener 2012: 49).
P omission:
(Wegener 2012: 56)
a. ghavi ‘to paddle’ → ‘ghavi-li ‘to paddle a canoe’
b. ale ‘to enter’ → a’le-li ‘to enter something’
c. sali ‘to wash away’ → sa’li-li ‘to wash something away’
d. ‘kasanga ‘to be angry’ → kasa’nga-li ‘to be angry about so. or sth.’
|
| Karajá | P-incorporation | The language also presents noun incorporation, which is generally a mechanism of possessor raising. In general, only inherently possessed nouns, such as body part terms, may be incorporated. Since only the possessed noun is incorporated, the valence of the incorporating verb remains unchanged, as the possessor is promoted to subject with intransitive verbs, or direct object with transitive verbs, e.g. (4a). And since a transitive verb remains transitive after having incorporated a noun, it can still be made passive (...), or antipassive (...) (Ribeiro 2001: 230-231) (KJ).
FYI: (...) noun incorporation in Karajá is generally a valence preserving process. Therefore, since a transitive verb remains transitive after having incorporated a noun, it can still be made passive or antipassive (Ribeiro 2012: 57).
Noun incorporation in Karajá is a process by which the head of the absolutive noun phrase is inserted into the verb, thereby forming a compound. The more productive pattern of noun incorporation involves only body-part terms, which are in general inherently possessed nouns. Since only the head of the absolutive noun phrase is incorporated, the valence of the resulting noun-verb compound remains unaltered (Ribeiro 2012: 55). |
| Karajá | P-oblique | (Ribeiro 2012: 51)
a.
hawɨkɨ ɗa-rikɔrɛ ∅-r-ɪ-ɗ-ə̃kə̃raθi-də̃=r-e
woman 3refl-offspring 3-ctfg-trans-I-ask-verb=ctfg-imperf
‘The woman questioned her son.’
b.
hawɨkɨ ɗa-rikɔrɛ=kɔ ∅-r-∅- ə̃kə̃raʃi=r-e
woman 3refl-offspring=all 3-ctfg-intr-ask=ctfg-imperf
‘The woman asked her son.’
With a few semi-transitive verbs (i.e., those which take non-canonically marked objects, such as an allative or dative argument), such as - ə̃kə̃raʃi ‘to ask’, transitivization results in the promotion of the former oblique argument to direct object (examples from the Xambioá dialect).
|
| Karajá | P-elimination | 'in Karajá, [...] antipassive, marked by the prefix ɔ- , results in the deletion of an unknown or irrelevant direct object' (Ribeiro 2012: 54)
'the antipassive construction in Karajá does not allow the expression of the demoted O whatsoever, which is an interesting parallel with what
happens to the agent in the passive construction.'
(Ribeiro 2012: 54-55) |
| Burushaski | P-elimination | 'The pair of @-qhís- ‘tear up’ and di-qhís- ‘tear, be torn’ has another intransitive stem without d- prefix, s- ‘tear up’,' (Yoshioka 2012: 276)
FYI: based on Yoshioka (2012: 276) (Figure 27) this is called antipassive and it occurs with covert P (KS). |
| Hurrian | P-oblique | 'When expressed, the direct object of an antipassive verb occurs in the essive.' (Campbell 2007: 39) @See Bezhta for interessive of P oblique (KJ).
|
| Hurrian | P-elimination | |