Chapter 35Formal Nouns and Nominalizing Constructions

35.1 Formal nouns and their modifiers

A formal noun (形式名詞) has a general meaning whose reference is supplied by a preceding modifier. These nouns normally cannot stand alone as complete noun phrases. They can head relative constructions, as in Satō's poro hike “the larger one” Satō (2008: 180). Nakagawa also uses the term noun particle, reflecting their limited independence Nakagawa (2024: 257–258).

The class boundary differs among descriptions. Bugaeva calls a corresponding small class bound nouns Bugaeva (2012: 470). Satō provisionally distinguishes formal nouns heading relative constructions from nominalizers that turn a content clause into a nominal expression Satō (2008: 175, 180). Nakagawa instead distinguishes a noun's subclass from its complementizer function Nakagawa (2024: 258–259, 507–510) ‹contested›.

35.2 Representative forms

Nakagawa's general inventory includes p/pe “thing,” hi “fact, thing, time, place,” hike “the one, the side,” katu “manner,” uske “place,” usi(ke) “time, place,” kur “person,” and utar “people, plural” Nakagawa (2024: 258). Their permitted modifiers and their further grammatical uses differ by item.

Satō gives both tan usi and tan usike with the demonstrative “this” Satō (2008: 181). A modifying clause is therefore only one of the available environments for these forms.

35.3 Dependence and clause modification

A modifying clause can identify the person, thing, time, or place denoted by its head. Satō's fragment illustrates a property predicate modifying hike:

Formal nouns differ from common nouns in their dependence and possessive morphology, and from pronouns in their ability to take clause modifiers Nakagawa (2024: 214–217). For the wider comparisons, see Chapter 34 (Nominal Subclasses and Dependence).

Nakagawa observes that p/pe and hi are closely joined in pronunciation to what precedes. Their syntactic scope can nevertheless encompass a whole verb phrase, which leads him to analyze these uses as clitics Nakagawa (2022: §3.3). Bugaeva also recognizes suffixal uses in particular word formations Bugaeva (2012: 470–471). The construction determines which properties are involved.

35.4 P and pe

Satō describes p after vowels and pe after consonants Satō (2008: 177, 180). These forms can head expressions referring to things or people. In his account, human reference with p/pe often has an unfavorable nuance, while kur is more polite Satō (2008: 180). The choice thus has pragmatic as well as grammatical consequences.

The forms also occur in content and sentence-final constructions. Their relative, complement, and final uses are distinguished in Chapter 101 (P and Pe: Participants, Content, and Clause Endings). Lexical formations such as amip “clothing” are treated in Chapter 40 (Noun Formation from Verbs and Nouns) Satō (2008: 266, 268–269).

35.5 Hi, places, and content clauses

Hi occurs with temporal, spatial, and content readings. In the following Saru example, the expression headed by hi is the object of “object to.” Nakagawa analyzes the preceding clause as complete: hi nominalizes its content without itself filling an argument position inside that clause Nakagawa (2024: 507–508).

In Nakagawa's arity analysis, this completed clause has no remaining argument position; a relative modifier retains a positive arity. He discusses uske and usi in both kinds of construction Nakagawa (2024: 508–510). Satō's distinction between nominalizers and formal nouns organizes these uses differently Satō (2008: 175, 180) ‹contested›.

Nakagawa's 2022 account restricts hi to verb-phrase modifiers, while his 2024 grammar records the restricted combination nea hi and analyzes contracted tani as tan + hi Nakagawa (2022: §3.4); Nakagawa (2024: 288). He also records Tokachi and Ishikari ihi, used almost exclusively in ene an ihi “the following is how it happened” Nakagawa (2024: 258).

35.6 People, plurality, and prospective complements

Kur can follow a clause or a prenominal: tan kur means “this person” Bugaeva (2012: 470). Utar also follows ordinary nouns. Nakagawa contrasts a clause meaning “the people whom I was helping” with cikappo utar “small birds” Nakagawa (2024: 258, examples 332–333). Its number meanings are described in Chapter 41 (Nominal Number and Utar).

Satō includes kuni and kunak among nominalizers, with prospective or intended content in their cited constructions Satō (2008: 177). Nakagawa discusses them among forms functioning as complementizers Nakagawa (2024: 510). Their selection and interpretation belong to Chapter 106 (Nominalized Complements and Complex Predicates).

35.7 Noun forms in evidential constructions

Four ordinary nouns have affiliative forms used in evidential constructions: ru → ruwe, haw → hawe, sir → siri, and hum → humi. Nakagawa associates their lexical bases with a path or trace, voice, appearance, and sound or feeling, respectively Nakagawa (2024: 259, Table 66). The possessive morphology differs among the words; see Chapter 45 (Affiliative Suffix Patterns).

Nakagawa describes their formal-noun-like uses alongside their ordinary noun status. Bugaeva classifies their evidential uses as particles Nakagawa (2024: 258–259); Bugaeva (2012: 470) ‹contested›. Lexical noun uses, complements, and final evidential constructions have different distributions, detailed in Chapter 120 (Formal Nouns and Evidential Constructions).

35.8 Nominal origins and grammatical functions

Several items combine lexical and grammatical uses. Satō distinguishes utar “relatives,” with affiliative utari, from its use after a noun or modifying clause Satō (2008: 181). Nakagawa treats the plural use as a development from the noun Nakagawa (2022: §3.3) ‹speculative›.

The analytical label nominalizer can cover a wider set than the formal-noun inventory: Refsing groups several types under that heading Refsing (1986: 259–264). The differences among lexical heads, clause nominalization, and connective uses are developed in Chapter 102 (Lexical Heads and Formal-Noun Nominalization).