| Voice marking | Proper marker | yes | Soninke has two verbal suffixes that can be involved in antipassivization (Creissels 2021: 293).
Creissels (1992) supports the recognition or an antipassive voice in Soninke (Creissels 2021: 294).
The derivational suffixes involved in antipassive constructions: the detransitivizing suffix -i and the antipassive suffix -ndì ~ -ndi) (Creissels 2021: 302). |
| Voice marking | Lookalike marker | no | |
| Voice marking | Synthetic marker | yes | Soninke has two verbal suffixes that can be involved in antipassivization defined as a morphologically marked alternation (Soninke 2021: 293).
The derivational suffixes involved in antipassive constructions: the detransitivizing suffix -i and the antipassive suffix -ndì ~ -ndi) (Creissels 2021: 302).
The multipurpose detransitivizing suffix acting as an antipassive marker with a limited number of verbs was originally a reflexive marker, whereas the dedicated antipassive suffix results from the grammaticalization of a verb ‘do’ in a cross-linguistically common type of antipassive periphrasis (Creissels 2021: 293). |
| Voice marking | Analytical marker | no | |
| Flagging | S-argument flagging | no | FYI: In Soninke, the alignment between transitive and intransitive predication is neutral in indexation but accusative in flagging (Creissles 2021a: 298). (@flagging is through a change of accent. We considered a flag as a bound morpheme) (KJ) |
| Flagging | P-oblique flagging | yes | Like adjuncts, oblique arguments are encoded as postpositional phrases that follow the verb (Creissels 2021: 298). |
| Flagging | P-oblique unflagging | no | |
| Flagging | P-oblique flagging variation | no | @The answer is based on the discussion provided in Creissels (2021: 307). |
| Indexation | S-argument indexed | n/a | |
| Indexation | S-argument indexation conditioned | n/a | |
| P-individuation properties | Incorporated P is generic (non-specific) | yes | Semantically, object incorporation implies a generic reading of the incorporated noun (Creissels 2018: 13).
|
| P-individuation properties | Incorporated P is indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | Incorporated P can be referential | yes | In both cases (antipassive and incorporation), the resulting intransitive verb can be used with reference to real events involving identifiable patientive participants, depending only on the speaker’s judgment about the relevance of providing more or less precisions about the patientive participant (Creissels 2021: 310).
|
| P-individuation properties | Oblique is generic (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | Oblique is indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | Oblique can be referential | yes | In Soninke, antipassive constructions are quite common in reference to specific events that are occurring at utterance time or have just occurred, and involve patientive participants whose identity is known to the speech act participants (...). The choice of an antipassive construction implies that the speaker estimates that, for any reason, the identity of the patientive participant need not be made explicit (Creissels 2021: 307).
Antipassive constructions can refer to specific events, provided no specific patient is mentioned (Creissels 2021: 293). |
| P-individuation properties | Eliminated P is generic (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | Eliminated P is indefinite (non-specific) | no | |
| P-individuation properties | Eliminated P can be referential | yes | In Soninke, antipassive constructions are quite common in reference to specific events that are occurring at utterance time or have just occurred, and involve patientive participants whose identity is known to the speech act participants (Creissels 2021: 307).
In both cases (antipassive & incorporation), the resulting intransitive verb can be used with reference to real events involving identifiable patientive participants, depending only on the speaker’s judgment about the relevance of providing more or less precisions about the patientive participant (Creissels 2021: 310). |
| Oblique affectedness | Less affected oblique | no | |
| P-constraining properties | Animacy constrains oblique demotion | no | |
| P-constraining properties | Person constrains oblique demotion | no | In Soninke, transitive verbs whose patientive argument is a discursively salient entity (either speech act participant or previously introduced participant) cannot occur in an antipassive construction. In such conditions, the only available option is a transitive construction in which the patientive argument is minimally represented
by a personal pronoun in object function (Creissels 2021: 306).
As already mentioned above, with transitive verbs whose patientive argument is a discursively salient entity, antipassive constructions are impossible, and the use
of object pronouns is obligatory, but I am aware of no other restriction on the use of antipassive constructions, apart from the obvious fact that the choice of an antipassive construction implies that the speaker estimates that, for any reason, the identity of the patientive participant need not be made explicit (Creissels 2021: 307).
|
| P-constraining properties | Number constrains oblique demotion | no | |