Chapter 40Noun Formation from Verbs and Nouns

40.1 Ways of forming nouns

Ainu nouns can be formed through affixation, compounding, nominal uses of verbs, and the lexicalization of larger expressions. Satō distinguishes formations containing two words from those combining a word with a prefix or suffix Satō (2008: 265–266). Nakagawa's compound account additionally uses nominal conversion of one-place verbs Nakagawa (2024: 267–272).

Several nominalizing forms participate in both word formation and clause-level constructions. Shibatani describes this dual use for p/pe, i, and related forms Shibatani (1990: 32–34). A lexical meaning such as “food” or “clothing” can coexist with grammatical properties inherited from a phrase.

40.2 Nouns with p and pe

Shibatani gives pirka-p “good thing,” husko-p “old thing,” wen-pe “poor person,” and ray-pe “the dead” Shibatani (1990: 32, example 37). The nominal expression refers to a person or thing characterized by the verbal material.

40.3 The analysis of lexical ci-

Satō distinguishes the ci- in ci-kuy-pas “chewed charcoal” from an ordinary person marker. He treats it as a derivational prefix with low productivity Satō (2008: 269, 304). Nakagawa likewise distinguishes nominalizing ci- from person ci=, while proposing a historical connection Nakagawa (2024: 592) ‹speculative›.

Other descriptions retain a person analysis in lexical nominalizations. Bugaeva glosses ci=ronnu-p “fox” with first-person plural exclusive A marking Bugaeva (2016: 100, example 5a). Tamura's entry for cep “fish” gives c(i)-e-p and interprets its first element as “we” Tamura (1996: s.v. cep). The synchronic treatment of these person-shaped elements differs among the accounts ‹contested›.

The lexical formation can also have a specialized meaning. Tamura's ci-karkar-pe denotes an embroidered, lined ceremonial garment Tamura (1996: s.v. cikarkarpe). The dictionary associates karkar with decoration or embroidery.

40.4 Instrument expressions

Nakagawa contrasts a relative-based utensil name with an ordinary compound:

In aesukep, person marking and the applicative identify the grammatical relation between the verb and the nominal head. In the compound suke-makiri “kitchen knife,” the association between “cook” and “knife” is expressed through compound formation Nakagawa (2024: 507). The compound patterns are described in Chapter 39 (Nominal Compounds and Their Structure).

40.5 Lexicalization and clause structure

A relative head has a grammatical relation to its modifying clause. A content complement nominalizes a complete proposition without requiring its head to fill an argument position inside that proposition Nakagawa (2024: 507–510). This distinction concerns clause structure. Lexicalization concerns whether a formation has become a conventional word, as in amip and aep. Both Satō and Nakagawa retain phrase-like properties in these lexical items Satō (2008: 269); Nakagawa (2024: 507).

Satō leaves the classification of kamuy-e-p “bear food” open between an ordinary phrase and a lexical item derived from one Satō (2008: 269). The wider syntactic distinctions are treated in Chapter 102 (Lexical Heads and Formal-Noun Nominalization).

40.6 Other nominalizing forms and possessed nouns

Shibatani also analyzes -i and -ike as noun-forming suffixes. His examples include esan-i “peninsula,” sinean-i “a certain place or time,” and pirka-ike “goodness, a good thing or person” Shibatani (1990: 32–33, example 38). He also recognizes phrasal and clausal uses of these forms.

40.7 Formal nouns as heads

Kur “person,” usi “time, place,” and uske “place” belong to Nakagawa's formal-noun inventory Nakagawa (2024: 258). Shibatani uses a suffix analysis for kur in both lexical names and larger nominal expressions Shibatani (1990: 33, example 40) ‹contested›. Their dependence and permitted modifiers are described in Chapter 35 (Formal Nouns and Nominalizing Constructions).

40.8 Nominal conversion and noun-based derivation

Nakagawa describes nominal uses of one-place verbs without an overt nominalizer. Ipe can mean “eat a meal,” “meal,” or “food,” with the nominal interpretation extending beyond the event itself Nakagawa (2024: 120–121). His grammatical evidence includes object use and nominal modification. Conversion also enters the compound analyses described in Chapter 39 (Nominal Compounds and Their Structure).

Noun-based formations include prefixes such as ar- in Satō's ar-kamyasi “real monster” and the diminutive -po in cep-po “small fish” Satō (2008: 266). Diminutive and affective formations are treated in Chapter 38 (Diminutive and Affective Noun Formation).

40.9 Historical analysis and the Sakhalin comparison

Bugaeva proposes that lexical nominalizing suffixes developed from nominalizing words and earlier nominal heads Bugaeva (2016: 100) ‹speculative›. The proposal connects lexical formation with relative-clause structure while retaining the different functions found in the later constructions.

Sakhalin comparison. Bugaeva contrasts Hokkaido formations with nominalizing words and West Coast Sakhalin verbal forms carrying possessive morphology. Her comparison includes clause nominalization and several sentence-level uses, but assigns no lexical noun-forming use to the Sakhalin verb-plus-possessive construction Bugaeva (2016: 113–114, Table 1). The historical relation between these strategies is presented as a proposed development Bugaeva (2016: 114) ‹speculative›.