Chapter 66Object Indexing: Monotransitive and Ditransitive Clauses

66.1 The O set in the person paradigm

A monotransitive verb indexes its object with the O column of the personal-index paradigm. In the standard Saru–Chitose baseline, that column contains en= for 1SG.O, un= for 1PL.EXCL.O, e= for 2SG.O, eci= for 2PL.O, a zero exponent for third person, and i= for the fourth/indefinite person Nakagawa (2024: 169); Bugaeva (2012: 471); Satō (2008: 31–32). The three-set S/A/O paradigm and its cell-by-cell alignment are set out in Chapter 62 (Architecture of the Personal-Affix System: The Four Persons and the S/A/O Paradigms); this chapter examines each O form in its monotransitive function, its morphological and positional properties, and the allomorphic contrasts that arise in specific combinations.

A finite verb carries at most one subject index and one object index; a third argument — such as the theme in a ditransitive clause — is never additionally person-indexed and surfaces as a bare noun phrase Satō (2023: 39, 47); Satō (2025: 369–371). The object index occupies the prefixal argument-marking layer immediately before the lexical stem, alongside the transitive subject index; derivational material — applicatives, the causative, the antipassive, the reflexive, and the root-attaching plural -pa — sits closer to the stem. The full template is treated in Chapter 69 (The Personal-Affix Template: Position Classes and Affix Ordering).

Ijäs's Lesson 5 introduces the O set through an "object markers" frame: the English object pronoun corresponds to a verbal prefix on the Ainu finite verb, so that "me" and "you" map onto en= and e= respectively Ijäs (2023). Her pedagogical notation uses hyphens throughout; the convention in this grammar is that = marks the personal-index boundary and - is reserved for derivational and stem-number morphology.

66.2 First-person singular object: en=

The prefix en= indexes a first-person singular object. Its S/A counterpart ku= covers both intransitive subject and transitive subject functions; the opposition ku= (S=A) versus en= (O) is the one nominative–accusative cell in the Hokkaido Ainu paradigm Bugaeva (2012: 472); Bugaeva (2008: 32); Nakagawa (2024: 166–169); Satō (2008: 31–32). The full 1SG row and the morphological properties of ku= are developed in Chapter 63 (First- and Second-Person Singular Affixes (ku=/en=, e=/e=)).

The combination 2A→1SG.O takes a dialect-specific shape. Most Hokkaido dialects form it with a second-person A prefix followed by en=: the expected sequences are e=en= (2SG.A→1SG.O) and eci=en= (2PL.A→1SG.O). Saru and Chitose drop the second-person A prefix and use bare en= for 2SG→1SG; Chitose extends the bare form to 2PL→1SG as well, so that the same surface prefix covers both 3→1SG and, in those dialects, 2→1SG — subject identification falls to discourse context or overt noun phrases Nakagawa (2024: 170, 173); Satō (2008: 146–147) ‹consensus›.

An oral-literary parallel uses i= where the colloquial register uses en=: in the elegant register the 2SG subject is again unexpressed, and i= appears as the first-person object prefix in the 2SG→1SG configuration Satō (2008: 261). The literary referential range of i= is part of the fourth-person narrative system, developed in Chapter 67 (The Indefinite/Fourth Person: Forms, Reference, and Agent-Defocusing).

66.3 First-person plural exclusive object: un=

The prefix un= indexes a first-person plural exclusive object. It belongs to the tripartite 1PL.EXCL row alongside ci= (A) and =as (S), all three formally distinct Nakagawa (2024: 166–169); Bugaeva (2012: 472); Bugaeva (2008: 32). The row is exclusive throughout: un= marks a speaker-group object that excludes the addressee, while addressee-inclusive 'us' is indexed in the object position by the fourth-person prefix i=. Tokachi confirms the same exclusive–inclusive split, with un= systematically opposed to the fourth-person object Takahashi (2015: 206–209) ‹consensus›.

The full exclusive paradigm and the clusivity opposition are developed in Chapter 64 (First-Person Plural and the Clusivity Question (ci=/=as, un=)).

66.4 Second-person objects: e= and eci=

Second-person indexes are role-neutral: e= marks 2SG as A, S, or O, and eci= does the same for 2PL, with no dedicated object form for either Tamura (1972: 27); Satō (2008: 32); Bugaeva (2012: 472). The role of e= in a transitive clause follows from discourse: a form such as e=kore may be read as 2SG.A acting on a zero-indexed third-person O, or as a zero-indexed third-person A acting on a 2SG.O, with overt noun phrases or context resolving the ambiguity. Ijäs notes this as one of the practically challenging features of the O set for learners of Saru Ijäs (2023).

The form eci= additionally serves as the portmanteau exponent for a first-person A acting on a second-person O: the four combinations 1SG.A→2SG.O, 1SG.A→2PL.O, 1PL.EXCL.A→2SG.O, and 1PL.EXCL.A→2PL.O all surface as bare eci=, without a separate first-person subject prefix Tamura (1972: 27–28); Bugaeva (2008: 38); Bugaeva (2012: 474); Nakagawa (2024: 170, 173). The portmanteau and its consequences for the combination paradigm are developed in Chapter 65 (The eci= Portmanteau (1A→2O) and Second-Person Plural Syncretism).

66.5 Fourth-person object: i=

The prefix i= is the O member of the fourth-person tripartite row, alongside a= (or dialectally an=) as A and =an as S. Nakagawa lists five referential uses for the form-set — inclusive first-plural, second-person honorific, impersonal or agent-defocusing, oral-narrative protagonist, and logophoric reference in reported speech; Bugaeva covers the same range under "indefinite", reanalysing the quotation use as logophoric; Tamura distributes the functions across analytically separate persons Nakagawa (2024: 169, 174–179); Bugaeva (2012: 474–476); Tamura (1972: 18–20, 28, 34, 39) ‹contested›. The full referential paradigm of the form-set is treated in Chapter 67 (The Indefinite/Fourth Person: Forms, Reference, and Agent-Defocusing); the concern here is i= as the object prefix common to all of those contexts.

The prefix i= is homophonous with the detransitivising prefix i-, which derives intransitive predicates from transitives — as in i-ruska ‘be angry at something unspecified’ beside transitive ruska ‘be angry at someone’. The two items belong to different grammatical layers: the object marker i= is a personal index in the paradigm, while the detransitivising i- belongs to valency-changing morphology and patterns with the reflexive yay- and the reciprocal u- Tamura (1972: 35); Nam (2021: 62–74). Their historical relationship is debated: the older analysis derives the antipassive from the fourth-person object marker; Bugaeva reverses the direction; Nam proposes a common source in the generic noun *hi/*ihi 'thing, place, time' ‹contested›. The detransitivising prefix is treated in Chapter 83 (The Antipassive / Detransitive i-).

66.6 Zero third-person object

Third-person objects carry no overt index. With a first- or second-person subject, the visible personal prefix is the A form alone — ku=, ci=, e=, eci=, or a=; with third-person subject and object alike, the finite verb carries no overt person prefix Nakagawa (2024: 169); Bugaeva (2012: 471).

Whether the absence of a third-person index reflects a zero affix or the simple absence of any third-person exponent is contested. Nakagawa treats third person as lacking an affix; Satō argues that a zero third-person affix must be posited to sustain the two-index cap — the ungrammaticality of sequences such as *Ø=en=e=kore 'one makes me give you' follows if both subject and object slots are already occupied by zero, blocking a third index Nakagawa (2024: 169); Satō (2023: 39); Satō (2025: 369) ‹contested›. The alignment implications of the zero versus absent-exponent analysis are pursued in Chapter 72 (Tripartite, Nominative-Accusative, and the Central Alignment Debate).