GB048 - grambank/grambank GitHub Wiki
Is there a productive morphological pattern for deriving an agent noun from a verb?
Summary
An agent nominalization derives from a verb and functions like a noun or noun phrase. The result denotes the agent of an action. In English, we can exemplify this with the productive -er suffix (bak-er, fish-er, garden-er, etc.). This feature targets phonologically bound overt nominalizers, including affixes, clitics, tonal markers, reduplication, ablaut, etc. This derivation pattern needs to be productive. Compounds of a verb root and a noun meaning 'person' are likely not agent nominalizations.
Procedure
- Code 1 if there is an element that attaches to verbs to form an agentive nominalization such as singer from sing and if it is not stated that the element is a noun meaning ‘person’.
- Do not code 1 if the relevant nouns are stated to be nouns in their own right and not derived.
- If nominalization is not discussed whatsoever, code ?.
- If nominalization is discussed at some length, but agent nominalization is not mentioned, code 0.
Examples
Chukchii (ISO 639-3: ckt, Glottolog: chuk1273)
The suffix -lʔ in Chukchii derives an agent noun from a verb, and is labeled "active particle" in the description. For example, with the verb ‘to go’:
təle ‘to go’
təle-lʔ-ə-n
go-NMLZ-ə-3SG.ABS
‘the one who goes’ (Dunn 1999: 138–139)
Chukchii is coded as 1 for this feature.
Further reading
Baker, Mark & Nadya Vinokurova. 2009. On agent nominalizations and why they are not like event nominalizations. Language 85(3): 517–556.
References
Dunn, Michael J. 1999. A grammar of Chukchi. Canberra: Australian National University. (Doctoral dissertation.)
Related Features
- GB047 Is there a productive morphological pattern for deriving an action/state noun from a verb?
- GB048 Is there a productive morphological pattern for deriving an agent noun from a verb?
- GB049 Is there a productive morphological pattern for deriving an object noun from a verb?
Patron
Hedvig Skirgård