GB049 - grambank/grambank GitHub Wiki

Is there a productive morphological pattern for deriving an object noun from a verb?

Summary

An object nominalization derives from a verb and functions like a noun or noun phrase. The result denotes the object or result of an action (e.g. song is derived from to sing). This feature targets phonologically bound overt nominalizers, including affixes, clitics, tonal markers, reduplication, ablaut, etc. There needs to be productive derivation for this feature to be coded 1. The nominalization strategy may also derive other types of nominalization. A compound of a verb root and a noun meaning 'thing' is not an object nominalization unless there is evidence that the noun has grammaticalized into an affix. Instrument derivations are not relevant since they do not denote the object resulting from the action/state.

Procedure

  1. Code 1 if there is an element which attaches to verbs to form an object nominalization.
  2. Do not code 1 if the relevant nouns are stated to be nouns in their own right and not derived.
  3. If nominalization is not discussed whatsoever, code ?.
  4. If nominalization is discussed at some length, but object nominalization is not mentioned, code 0.

Examples

Semelai (ISO 639-3: sza, Glottolog: seme1247)

In Semelai the affix pn derives object nouns from verbs. For example, reŋ ‘to seek’ -> pn.ᵈreŋ ‘thing sought’ (Kruspe 2004: 67). Semelai is coded as a 1.

Further reading

Comrie, Bernard & Sandra A. Thompson. 2007. Lexical nominalization. In Shopen, Timothy (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description Vol. III: Grammatical categories and the lexicon, 334–381. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Payne, Thomas E. 1997. Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pages 223–231 cover different types of nominalization.

References

Kruspe, Nicole. 2004. A grammar of Semelai. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Related Features

Patron

Hedvig Skirgård