Knowledge base · Part XI — Valency, Voice, and Noun Incorporation · this topic as a network

83. The Antipassive / Detransitive i-

What does the prefix i- contribute to a transitive verb, and how does it detransitivize the clause?

Form and function in the arity calculus

What does the prefix i- do to a transitive verb's argument structure in terms of arity?

Not only theme/patient objects but also recipient objects can undergo antipassivization in Ainu. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4, 15.6) The prefix i- derives intransitive verbs from transitive verbs by providing an inbuilt object meaning 'somebody' or 'something'. (Refsing 1986: 31) The prefix i- denotes that somebody or something is the object of the verb in Shizunai. (Refsing 1986) Antipassivization deletes an object, whereas applicativization adds an object. (Bugaeva 2012: 500–501) A non-referential or indefinite causee can be backgrounded by the antipassive prefix i-. (Bugaeva 2014) The prefix i- functions as an antipassive marker that eliminates a Patient, Theme, or Recipient argument and derives a 1-argument verb from a 2-argument verb. (reported in Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4) Transitive verbs prefixed with i- function as Class II verbs and can be used as nouns. (Kindaichi & Chiri 1936) The prefix i- can attach to transitive verbs with a vague sense of 'things' without pointing to any specific entity, thereby serving to detransitivize the verb. (Kindaichi & Chiri 1936) The prefix i- is translated as 'that, thing' and serves to fill the object position of a transitive verb with a generic or non-specific entity, deriving an intransitive verb. (Nakagawa 2024: 190) Ainu has antipassive constructions marked by the verbal prefix i-. (Nam 2021) The antipassive marker i- detransitivizes originally transitive predicates so that they appear without overt object expressions. (Nam 2021) The prefix i- derives intransitive verbs from transitive verbs by incorporating an object of indeterminate meaning ('somebody, something'). (Refsing 1986: 141) The verb iku is derived by prefixing i- to the transitive verb ku 'drink', incorporating an object with the indeterminate meaning 'somebody, something'. (Refsing 1986: 142) The verb i-ruska 'to get angry' is composed of the indefinite object prefix i- and the verb ruska 'to be angry'. (Satō 2008: 300) The generalized object prefix i- marks the absorption of a generalized object by a verb. (Shibatani 1990) The generalized object prefix i- means 'do X', where the reference of i- is inferred from the meaning of the verb. (Shibatani 1990: 46) The generalized object prefix i- decreases the valence of a verb, turning a transitive verb into an intransitive verb. (Shibatani 1990: 46)

Semantic domains and lexicalization

In which semantic domains is the i- detransitivization productive, and how many verb lexemes form such derivatives?

Some semi-transitive verb forms derived with the prefix i- have become thoroughly lexicalized in Shizunai, undergoing phonetic changes or semantic specialization. (Refsing 1986) Antipassives in Ainu are much less productive than applicatives or causatives and are derived only from certain verb classes, such as verbs of pursuit, affected subject, perception, cognition, and interaction. (Bugaeva 2012: 486–487) Antipassives in Ainu derive from verbs of perception, cognition, ingesting, interaction, communication, grooming, and traditional activities, but never from highly transitive verbs of creation, transformation, contact by impact, or effective action. (reported in Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4) Antipassives in i- are unproductive. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.6) Antipassive formation with i- never applies to highly transitive verbs of creation, transformation, contact by impact, or effective action. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.6) The forms inkar 'to see' and ipe 'to eat/dine' are etymologically analyzed as i-nukar and i-e respectively, formed with the detransitivizing prefix i-. (reported in Nakagawa 2024: 191) With certain transitive verbs whose patient is obvious to everyone, i- is used to refer to the object vaguely and euphemistically as a generic entity, as in i-ku 'to drink alcohol', i-omante 'to send off the spirit of a bear or other major deity', and i-carpa 'to make ancestral offerings'. (Nakagawa 2024: 191) The derived verb iku has undergone semantic specialization and always means 'drink alcohol'. (Refsing 1986: 141) The verb iku has undergone semantic specialization such that it specifically means 'drink alcohol'. (Refsing 1986: 142) The verb inunpa literally analyzes as i- 'things' plus nunpa 'strain, squeeze', but in actual usage it is restricted to straining liquor (sake). (Satō 2008: 95) ikaspaotte is a verb meaning 'to order people', formed with the derivational prefix i- meaning 'indefinite entity, people'. (Satō 2008: 303) The indefinite-object prefix i- derives the intransitive verb i-ruska 'to be angry at something / to be angry' from the transitive verb ruska. (Satō 2023) The verb iyomare 'pour sake' is morphologically analyzed as i-y-oma-re, consisting of the three-argument verb omare 'X puts Z into Y' prefixed by the indefinite marker i- 'something'. (Satō 2023) When attached to verbs like ku 'drink', the generalized object prefix i- is normally understood to refer to alcoholic beverages. (Shibatani 1990) Synchronically, the intransitive verb ipe 'to eat' is fully lexicalized rather than transparently composed of i- and pe, because the transitive verb for 'to eat' is e and no transitive verb pe exists. (Shibatani 1990: 46) Ainu yomai 'vulva, vagina' is derived from i-oma-i, consisting of the antipassive prefix i-, oma 'to insert', and the nominalizer -i 'place'. (Vovin 2022: 6.6)

The label debate: antipassive or derivational prefix?

Is the detransitivizing prefix i- best described as an antipassive marker or as a derivational prefix introducing an unspecified object?

In recent linguistic descriptions, the prefix i- is frequently treated as marking the antipassive voice because it occupies the object slot of a transitive verb and removes the object from argument status. (reported in Nakagawa 2024: 191) The verbal prefix i- appearing in detransitivized constructions was traditionally analyzed in Ainu linguistics as an indefinite object marker. (reported in Nam 2021) Kindaichi and Chiri classify the prefix i- among the pronominal affixes rather than as a verb prefix. (reported in Refsing 1986: 31) Forms containing the derivational prefix i- 'unspecified person/thing' can exceptionally serve as honorific expressions (e.g. k-eypakasnu expressing more deference than eci-epakasnu). (Satō 2008: 211)

Homophony: antipassive i- and the fourth-person object i=

How are the detransitivizing prefix i- and the homophonous fourth-person object marker i= distinguished?

The antipassive prefix i- can function as an unspecified possessor marker on obligatorily possessed nouns incorporated as objects of transitive verbs. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.6; reported in Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4) The prefix i- is never attested in Shizunai material functioning as a nominative case marker of the first-person singular, third person, or indefinite person. (Refsing 1986: 31) When i- is used in its original objective position, it means 'that (thing) [as object]' referring to a conventional object (e.g., sake in i-ku 'drink alcohol'). (Kindaichi & Chiri 1936) The fourth person bound pronoun i- was argued by Bugaeva to have developed from the antipassive prefix i- through its patient-defocusing function becoming able to indirectly mention a speech act participant. (reported in Nam 2021)

Syntactic diagnostics and re-applicativization

What argument alternation does the i- antipassive instantiate, and how is the remaining agent argument cross-referenced?

In antipassives derived from bivalent transitives, the object is completely blocked and cannot be expressed as an oblique, resulting in an intransitive verb. (Bugaeva 2012: 486–487) Antipassives derived from trivalent transitives are possible and decrease the valency without causing intransitivization, typically antipassivizing the Theme argument, though antipassivization of the Recipient argument is also possible. (Bugaeva 2012: 486–487) In direct causatives formed with -V or -ke, the causee object has especially high affectedness, and unlike in direct causatives with -ka and -re/-e/-te, it cannot undergo antipassivization or noun incorporation. (Bugaeva 2014) A non-referential or indefinite causee of -ka causatives can be backgrounded by the valence-reducing antipassive prefix i-, in which case the causee cannot be expressed at all. (Bugaeva 2014) The derivational antipassive/absolutive prefix i- is sometimes used to encode an unspecified possessor on obligatorily possessed nouns when they are incorporated. (Bugaeva, Nichols & Bickel 2022) The antipassive prefix i- functions as a non-possessed noun marker when incorporated with obligatorily possessed nouns whose possessor is non-coreferential with the subject. (Bugaeva, Nichols & Bickel 2022) Ainu possesses both an unspecified possessor marker in the fourth-person prefix (as in a-sik-ihi 'someone's eye(s)') and an antipassive prefix i- used in noun incorporation with non-coreferential possessors (as in i-rekut-tuye 'cut someone's throat'). (Bugaeva, Nichols & Bickel 2022) Obligatorily possessed nouns incorporated with non-coreferential possessors require the antipassive/absolutive prefix i-. (Bugaeva, Nichols & Bickel 2022) The antipassive/absolutive prefix i- can attach to an obligatorily possessed noun to allow it to be used without a specified possessor. (Bugaeva 2022: 1.5) The prefix i- on obligatorily possessed nouns functions as an unspecified possessor marker that enables independent use of the noun. (proposed in Bugaeva 2022: 1.5) Antipassivization in Ainu changes transitive subject indexing (A) to intransitive subject indexing (S), and the original object is obligatorily omitted. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4) Antipassives derived from 3-argument verbs resulting in 2-argument verbs are rare in Ainu, whereas applicativizing an antipassive verb to restore a 2-argument frame is much more common. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.4) Antipassives can be formed from direct causatives in Ainu. (Bugaeva & Kobayashi 2022: 15.6) In Ainu, antipassive verbs do not allow any overt expression of the object. (reported in Nam 2021) Because inunpa contains the object meaning i- 'things', it is an intransitive verb that cannot take further objects, and thus it takes the intransitive first-person plural subject affix -an. (Satō 2008: 95)

Origin: the three-way reconstruction debate

What historical origins have been proposed for the antipassive prefix i-, and how does it relate to the fourth-person object marker?

The antipassive in Ainu is marked with the derivational prefix i-, which historically originated in the pronominal indefinite object marker i-. (Bugaeva 2012: 486–487) The Ainu antipassive prefix i- is assumed to have originated from the generic noun *hi or *ihi rather than *i. (proposed in Nam 2021) The antipassive prefix in Ainu occurs only as i-, and not as *hi-. (Nam 2021) The antipassive prefix i- and the nominalizing suffix -i both developed from the generic noun hi (or ihi) via phonological reduction from /hi/ to /i/. (proposed in Nam 2021) The Ainu antipassive prefix i- originates from the generic noun (i)hi 'thing, place, time' via object incorporation. (Nam 2021) The reconstructed pre-form *i-o-i has the same meaning ('vulva, vagina') as yomai. (proposed in Vovin 2022: 6.6)