Chapter 89Subject Incorporation and External Possessors

89.1 Three subject-incorporation patterns

Subject incorporation includes three constructions with different effects on the remaining argument frame: a natural phenomenon incorporated into an intransitive predicate, a possessor-requiring noun incorporated into a state predicate, and a natural force incorporated into a transitive predicate. Satō distinguishes all three from object incorporation Satō (2008: 224–226); Satō (2022: §§3.2–3.4).

“Subject” names the noun's relation in the base construction. Once incorporated, the noun belongs to a verbal stem. Satō explicitly cautions that grammatical-relation terms are being extended to describe these word-internal relations Satō (2008: 225).

89.2 Natural phenomena and zero-argument predicates

The natural-phenomenon type is tightly restricted. Satō's Handbook account identifies sir “weather, surroundings” and me “cold” in forms such as sir-pirka “the weather is good” and me-an “it is cold.” He describes these incorporated stems as lacking the corresponding free-noun construction in this use Satō (2022: §3.2).

The resulting zero-argument predicate has no ordinary personal subject to index. This construction is related to the environmental predicates described in Chapter 57 (Transitivity and Valency Classes).

89.3 Possessed stems and an external possessor

A body-part or other possessor-requiring noun can combine with a stative intransitive verb while its possessor becomes the subject of the whole compound. Satō illustrates the contrast with hands being heavy Satō (2022: §3.3).

The possessed stem occurs inside the verb, but a separate personal possessor is not inserted there. Satō calls the noun's form “possessed” for convenience while distinguishing its function from an ordinary possessed noun phrase Satō (2008: 225). Nakagawa gives kew-e-ri “be tall” and par-o-ruy “be talkative,” with the possessed stems of “skeleton” and “mouth.” His keweri=an “we are tall” shows S marking on the compound Nakagawa (2024: 489).

Satō classifies this construction as Type II in Mithun's framework because an incorporated noun has a grammatical relation to a participant outside the verb Mithun (1984) (as applied in Satō (2022: §3.3)). He calls the remaining possessor stranded and uses this dependency in his explanation of the construction's restricted distribution. The proposed hierarchy and its numerical weights are discussed in Chapter 90 (Incorporation, Quasi-Incorporation, and Word Structure).

89.4 Natural-force actors and affected subjects

A natural force can also be incorporated as the actor of a transitive base. The affected participant then becomes the subject of the resulting intransitive verb. Satō's comparison makes the change from O to S marking explicit Satō (2022: §3.4).

Nakagawa gives a Chitose narrative example with rittursere=an, analyzing the verb as rir “wave” plus turse “fall” and causative -re. The source retains the surface consonant sequence ritt- Nakagawa (2024: 490, example 1119).

His Saru example of being affected by rain, snow and wind has a mortar as its first-person narrator. The patient-like meaning still takes S marking because the compound is intransitive Nakagawa (2024: 490, example 1121, citing Chiba University 2015:190). Semantic affectedness does not create a separate lexical alignment rule.

89.5 Restrictions and competing explanations

These natural-force examples differ from the ordinary agentive subjects usually excluded from incorporation. Earlier blanket exclusions of transitive subjects do not describe the full range documented by Satō and Nakagawa Shibatani (1990: 62–63); Satō (2008: 224–226); Nakagawa (2024: 489–490).

Satō's Handbook chapter reviews an unaccusative account associated with Kobayashi and argues that it does not adequately predict the small number of intransitive-subject combinations or the natural-force transitive pattern. Low agentivity gives a broader semantic characterization, with specificity and lexical restrictions also relevant ‹contested› Satō (2022: §1). Neither label establishes that arbitrary low-agentivity nouns and verbs can combine.