Chapter 83Antipassive and Unspecified-Object i-

83.1 An unspecified object and a changed argument frame

Derivational i- forms verbs whose object is left unspecified or understood as part of a conventional activity. A two-place verb commonly becomes one-place: huraye “wash something” yields i-huraye “do laundry.” Nakagawa describes the prefix through its generalized nominal meaning and its reduction of arity. Bugaeva and Kobayashi use the term antipassive, emphasizing object suppression, generic interpretation, and the discourse focus on the actor and activity Nakagawa (2024: 190–191); Bugaeva & Kobayashi (2022: §4.2.3). The nominal-prefix and antipassive accounts highlight different aspects of the construction ‹contested›.

The change of person series supplies a morphological diagnostic when the resulting verb is one-place. In the next example, i-ri “skin the catch” takes the fourth-person S form =an. The corresponding transitive use of ri has an A form Bugaeva & Kobayashi (2022: §4.2.3, example 24).

83.2 Conventional activities and lexical restrictions

An unspecified object can have a fairly specific conventional interpretation: i-ku denotes drinking alcohol, i-tese weaving mats, and i-carpa making offerings to ancestors. The object remains part of the event's meaning even though it has no separate expression in the clause Nakagawa (2024: 190–191); Bugaeva & Kobayashi (2022: §4.2.3).

The Handbook describes limited productivity and substantial lexicalization. Its sample of 48 verbal lexemes concentrates on perception, cognition, ingestion, interaction, communication, grooming, and traditional activities. This is a published sample, with semantic restrictions proposed for its distribution Bugaeva & Kobayashi (2022: §4.2.3). Nakagawa also reports historical analyses of inkar from i-nukar and the verb ipe “eat a meal” from i-e Nakagawa (2024: 191). These analyses involve lexical history and phonological change.

83.3 Interaction with applicatives and higher valency

Reducing a three-place verb by one argument leaves a transitive verb. Bugaeva's example of serving illustrates theme suppression while the recipient remains expressed Bugaeva (2012: 487).

An applicative can also follow antipassivization in the derivation. In e-i-kasuy, the people helped are left unspecified and e- introduces the work. The final verb again has two arguments Bugaeva (2012: 487); Bugaeva & Kobayashi (2022: §4.2.3, example 25).

Lexicalized verbs may depart from simple arithmetic. Satō discusses iyomare “pour alcohol,” classified as intransitive in the Nakagawa and Tamura dictionaries despite its analysis with the three-place base omare. He proposes that the ritual context already supplies the location, a cup, before i- suppresses the theme. He leaves the extent of this pragmatic reduction unresolved ‹speculative› Satō (2023: 57–59, example 20 and note 20).

83.4 The historical relationship with person i=

Derivational i- and fourth-person object i= have different grammatical functions; see Chapter 67 (Fourth-Person Forms and Their Uses). Their historical relationship remains disputed. Bugaeva's 2012 account derives the antipassive from indefinite person marking, while also considering a deeper relationship with the bound noun hi/i Bugaeva (2012: 486). Her later 2021 analysis, reported by Nam, instead derives the antipassive from incorporation of a generic noun and proposes that person marking developed from the antipassive ‹contested› Nam (2021: 64–66).

Nam supports the generic-noun account but reconstructs *hi or *ihi. He compares nominalizing and possessive morphology and suggests ways in which the initial consonant could have disappeared. These are historical hypotheses ‹speculative› Nam (2021: 65–66, 73–74). The distinction between an unspecified incorporated participant and an indexed participant also matters for the quasi-incorporation constructions in Chapter 90 (Incorporation, Quasi-Incorporation, and Word Structure).