Chapter 60Verb Formation from Nouns and Verbal Roots

60.1 Lexical formation and productive derivation

Ainu verb stems include formations based on nouns, formations from bound roots, and derivations from independently usable verbs. These sources need to be distinguished: recognizing meaningful parts in an established word does not make every new combination available Refsing (1986: 146–150); Nakagawa (2024: 198–210).

Refsing describes a set of lexicalized Shizunai verbs consisting of a nominal root and a verb formative. She explicitly regards these formatives as nonproductive in that account. Some also occur as independent verbs, while others have no independent use Refsing (1986: 146, §13.6).

60.2 Verbs formed from nominal roots

Refsing's examples cover time, possession, bodily conditions, and spontaneous events. The table gives selected lexical formations with her meanings Refsing (1986: 146–150).

In these formations, -kor and -sak express possession and absence; -nu also forms possession-related verbs. Their lexical meanings can be more specific than a literal combination of the parts Refsing (1986: 148–149). Alonso de la Fuente compares such formatives in a historical account, which raises a separate question about their development Alonso de la Fuente (2022: §3.1, table 16).

Refsing also treats soy(e)ne “go out” as a formation containing -ne. An ordinary noun followed by a person-marked copula remains a separate construction; its surface resemblance does not establish the same lexical structure Refsing (1986: 149); Nakagawa (2024: 132).

60.3 Independent verbs and bound roots

Several intransitive–transitive pairs share a root. Nakagawa distinguishes a bound root such as kom from the usable stems komke “bend” and komo “bend something.” In other pairs the root is itself an independent intransitive Nakagawa (2024: 136, 198–199).

These are lexical formation patterns, with different formative vowels. They do not give one uniform direction of derivation from an independent intransitive verb. Plural formations such as tuypa share the root while replacing the singular formative Nakagawa (2024: 199, tables 38–39). See Chapter 58 (Verbal Number and Stem Alternation).

60.4 Transitivity pairs with different degrees of resemblance

Satō separates rare identical intransitive and transitive forms from partly related pairs and pairs with no transparent formal connection. His Chitose examples include inunpa / nunpa “strain, filter” alongside ipe / e “eat” and itak / ye “speak/say” Satō (2008: 97).

Nakagawa also lists visibly related pairs such as inu / nu and ikka / eikka Nakagawa (2024: 131, table 13). Formal resemblance can support a lexical comparison without establishing a freely productive prefix rule. The argument-frame differences remain essential when using these verbs in a clause.

60.5 Different uses of kar

Alongside the nominal-root formations above, Nakagawa describes -kar added to an intransitive verb to introduce an object. His pairs include peray / peraykar “fish / catch something by fishing” and cis / ciskar “cry / cry for someone.” In imek / imekkar, the added object is the recipient of food being carried Nakagawa (2024: 208, examples 209–210).

A same-shaped addition to an already transitive verb can leave argument count unchanged. Nakagawa compares kocari with kocarikar, and cioranke with ciorankekar. He connects this use especially with metrical requirements in verse Nakagawa (2024: 208–209, examples 211–214). The valency effect therefore belongs to the particular construction.

60.6 Intensive no and other derivations

Verbal intensive -no strengthens a predicate's meaning while preserving its verbal use. Nakagawa gives retar-no, realized as retanno “be pure white,” and ipe-no “eat well” Nakagawa (2024: 209). These differ from the adverbial formations discussed in Chapter 61 (Adverbial and Intensive No).

Causatives, applicatives, reflexives, and incorporation form further derived stems, sometimes changing the argument frame and sometimes preserving it. Their order and relation to person marking are outlined in Chapter 56 (The Verb Word and Its Boundaries). Their individual restrictions require the construction-specific treatment in Chapter 73 (Valency and Voice Constructions).