Chapter 39Nominal Compounds and Their Structure

39.2.1 Person-marker position

In poro a=yupi “my big elder brother,” the person marker follows poro. In the corresponding compound a=poroyupi, it precedes the whole formation Nakagawa (2024: 265). Since intransitive poro takes S marking, Nakagawa interprets the initial A-series marker in the latter as belonging to the nominal compound.

39.2.2 Affiliative endings

The position of a possessive ending can identify a different grouping:

In the first expression, the affiliative ending follows “wife”; in the second, it follows the whole compound. Nakagawa also records forms such as a=yup-i utar-i, with endings on both words, often with much the same meaning as the corresponding single plural expression Nakagawa (2024: 265). The formal grouping does not by itself fix every semantic distinction.

39.2.3 Lexicalized meaning

Nakagawa contrasts retar cikap “white bird” with retatcir “swan.” The latter has a conventional species meaning and contains cir, which is not independently used in this comparison Nakagawa (2024: 266). Semantic specialization helps here, but becomes less decisive for transparent formations such as ni-kap “tree bark.”

39.2.4 Conceptual noun forms

Nakagawa proposes treating conceptual-form plus conceptual-form combinations as compounds, including sik-kap “eyelid,” ni-kap “tree bark,” and cep-kap “fish skin” Nakagawa (2024: 266–267). This supplies a structural criterion where the degree of lexicalized meaning is hard to judge. It is part of his analysis of the relationship between compounding and possession.

39.4.1 A possessed part as subject

In Type V, the affiliative noun is the subject of the property verb. The resulting name refers to its possessor: ami-tanne “crab” combines “its claws” and “long”; teke-tanne “thief” combines “its hands” and “long” Nakagawa (2024: 271–272). Kindaichi and Chiri also describe the possessed first element in this pattern Kindaichi & Chiri (1936: 171, §222).

39.4.2 An incorporated object

In Type VI, the noun fills the object role of a two-place transitive verb. Nakagawa analyzes cikap-koyki “hawk” from “bird” and “attack, bully.” Object incorporation produces a one-place verb, and nominal conversion produces the lexical name Nakagawa (2024: 272). The underlying operation is described in Chapter 88 (Object Noun Incorporation).

39.5.1 Attributive relations

A compound's meaning can identify a kind, a use, or a characteristic. In tokapipe “lunch,” “daytime” qualifies the nominal use of “eat.” Nakagawa also records verbal ku=tokapipe “I eat lunch” Nakagawa (2024: 270–271). The lexical formation can thus participate in both nominal and verbal constructions.

39.5.2 Names containing kor and kur

Tamura records cisekorkur “householder” and kotankorkur “village head,” with corresponding separated forms Tamura (1996: s.vv. cisekorkur, kotankorkur). Shibatani presents kotan kor-kur in his treatment of nominalization Shibatani (1990: 33, example 40b). These analyses connect lexical names with the relative-head use of kur “person.”

39.5.3 Compounds and explicit clause relations

Nakagawa contrasts the plant name wakkakukuttar with ani wakka ku kuttar “the hollow-stemmed plant with which someone drank water.” The modifying clause retains the instrumental expression ani; the compound expresses the associated use through lexical composition Nakagawa (2024: 269).

39.5.4 Possessor and actor names

The names in Types V–VI can refer to the possessor of a body part or the actor of an incorporated-verb formation. Their referent need not be denoted by an independent nominal head inside the word Nakagawa (2024: 271–272). The modifier–head description of ordinary noun–noun compounds therefore has a narrower domain than the full six-type classification.