Chapter 61Adverbial and Intensive No

61.1 Manner adverbs from property predicates

Adding -no to many property-denoting intransitives produces an adverbial expression. Nakagawa gives pirka-no “well,” pon-no “small, in a small way,” and ukattuyma-no “far apart, at long intervals.” He describes the pattern as productive, especially with predicates of state or quality Nakagawa (2024: 275–276). Refsing gives a corresponding Shizunai account Refsing (1986: 134–135).

The adverb describes the manner or quality of the action. Its meaning can become specialized: poronno expresses quantity, “a lot/many,” rather than simply reproducing the meaning “big” of poro Nakagawa (2024: 276, 341).

61.2 Forms and lexical restrictions

In pon-no, the predicate pon ends in n and the suffix begins with the same consonant. The resulting ponno follows directly from that boundary. Poronno has an additional consonant relative to poro; Nakagawa also explicitly records porono Nakagawa (2024: 275–276).

Adverbial use need not always carry -no. Nakagawa lists tunas “early/quickly,” moyre “slowly,” hanke “near,” and tuyma “far” with unsuffixed adverbial uses alongside suffixed forms Nakagawa (2024: 276). Refsing additionally describes bare pirka and wen in her Shizunai account Refsing (1986: 135).

61.3 Transitive-derived adverbs

Some adverbial expressions derive from transitive verbs and retain a relation to an object. Nakagawa compares tura and turano “together with,” which can alternate in his examples. The same pattern is unavailable with instrumental ani: he rejects *anino Nakagawa (2024: 276–277, examples 352–355).

These restrictions prevent extending the suffix mechanically to every transitive verb. The postposed-adverb constructions are described in Chapter 53 (Place Particles and Motion Expressions).

61.4 Adverbial no and clause-linking no

The boundary between an adverbial suffix and connective no receives different treatments. Refsing identifies the adverb-forming element with her conjunctionalizer. Nakagawa recognizes continuity between the uses but finds a uniform analysis difficult Refsing (1986: 134); Nakagawa (2024: 276, 340–341) ‹contested›.

Nakagawa considers person-marked k=eyam no, “taking care,” particularly revealing. Treating the whole form as an adverb requires an adverb with A-series person marking; treating it as a verbal phrase followed by a connective preserves ordinary verbal indexing. Conversely, specialized quantity poronno is awkward to analyze as an ordinary unchanged predicate plus connective Nakagawa (2024: 340–341).

With a negative predicate, no commonly links a state of not doing something to a following event.

Nakagawa's explicitly Saru comparison accepts somo ipe no soyne, “go out without eating,” while rejecting *ipe no soyne for an ordinary sequence of eating and going out. He contrasts this with wa for a resulting state and kor for ongoing activity Nakagawa (2024: 341). The comparison concerns these constructions and their temporal interpretation; negative clauses have further linking possibilities discussed in Chapter 126 (Clausal Negation with Somo).

61.5 Intensive no remains verbal

A same-shaped verbal suffix intensifies a predicate. Nakagawa gives retar-no, realized as retanno “be pure white,” hure-no “be bright red,” and ipe-no “eat well.” These are verbs in his analysis and retain verbal person marking Nakagawa (2024: 209).

Satō also lists intensive formations with transitive bases, including nu-no and rayke-no Satō (2008: 274). The two inventories have different scopes, while both distinguish intensified verbal meaning from ordinary manner modification.