Inflection and derivation in verbal morphology: a borderline case from agglutinative languages.

Main Article Content

Mikołaj Nkollo


The present paper focuses on the linguistic status of causative formatives in Kazakh verbal morphology. In Kazakh traditional grammars, these morphological elements are claimed to represent factitive voice. Hence, they are viewed as an instance of inflection. This point of view is subject to thorough investigation. It is argued that word's single occurrence cannot cumulate several values of one grammatical category (e.g. nouns are never doubly marked for the category of number, adjectives are never carriers of more than one value within the category of degree, etc.). Kazakh verbs, in their turn, are able to contain the factitive and passive (or reflexive) morpheme at a time. The reason of this compatibility lies in merely derivational (non-categorial) nature of causative modifiers in verbal morphology of Kazakh language.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

Jak cytować
Nkollo, M. (2004). Inflection and derivation in verbal morphology: a borderline case from agglutinative languages. Studia Romanica Posnaniensia, 31, 393-406.


  1. Aquist L. (2002), Old Foundations for the Logic of Agency and Action. Studia Logica: an International Journal of Symbolic Logic LXXII (3), 313-338.
  2. Bally Ch. (1926/1996), The Expression of concepts of the personal domain and indivisibility in Indo-European Languages, in H. Chappell and W. McGregor (eds.), 1996, The Grammar of Inalienability. Berlin-New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 31-61.
  3. Bańczerowski J. (1999a), Diversity of Flection, in M. Klańskaand P. Wiesinger (eds), Vielfnlt der Sprachen. Festschrift fu r Aleksander Szulc żuru 75. Geburtstag. Wien: Edition Praesens, 483-504.
  4. Bańczerowski J. (1999b), Toward a grammar of flection. Investigationes Linguisticae VI. 5-84.
  5. Bańko M. (2002), Wykłady z polskiej fleksji. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
  6. Beard R. (1998), Derivation, in A. Spencer and A.M. Zwicky (eds), The Handbook oj Morphology, Oxford-Maiden: Blackwell Publishers, 44-65.
  7. Bogusławski A. (1992), Two Essays on Inflection. Warszawa; Energeia.
  8. Bybee I.L. (1985), Morphology. A study of the relation between meaning and form. AmsterdamPhiladelphia: John Benjamins (Typological Studies in Language 9).
  9. Carstairs-McCarthy A. (1998), Paradigmatic Structure: Inflectional Paradigms and Morphological Classes, in A. Spencer, A.M. Zwicky (eds), The Hantibook of Morphology. Oxford-Maiden: Blackwell Publishers, 322-344.
  10. Carvalho de P. (1996), «Partitif», génitif, article: pour renverser l ’inverseur et repenser l'article français. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris XCI (1). 169-221.
  11. Corbett G.G. (1987), Tiie Morphology/Syntax Interface: Evidence from Possessive Adjectives in Slavonic. Language 63 (2). 299-345.
  12. Dalrymple M., M. Kanazawa, Y. Kim, S. Mchombo, S. Peters (2001), Reciprocal Expressions and the Concept of Reciprocity. Linguistics and Philosophy 21 (2). 159-210.
  13. Goldberg A.E. (2001), Patient arguments of causative verbs can be omitted: the role tif information structure in argument distribution. Language Sciences 23 (4-5). 503-524.
  14. Hakkani-Tür D.Z., K. Oflazer, G. Tür (2002), Statistical Morphological Disambiguation for Agglutinative Languages. Computers and the Humanities 36 (4). 381-410.
  15. Heinz A. (1961), Fleksja a derywacja. Język Polski XL1 (5), pp. 343-354.
  16. Johanson L. (1998), Code-copying in Irano-Turkic. Language Sciences 20 (3). 325-337.
  17. Karolak S. (1990), Kwantypkacja a determinacja iv językach naturalnych. Warszawa: PWN.
  18. Kempf Z. ( 1975), O przypadkach sprzężonych. Prace Filologiczne XXV. 147-154.
  19. Lamiroy B. (1993), L'incomplétude du passif dans les langues romanes, en S. Karolak, T. Muryn (eds), Complétude et incamplétude dans les langues romanes et slaves. Actes du VI colloque international de linguistique romane et slave. Cracovie 29 septembre - 3 octobre 1991. Kraków: Ecole Normale Supérieure - Institut d'Etudes Romanes, 241-266.
  20. Matthews P.H. (1991), Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Nagórko A. (1993), Czy istnieje słowotwórstwo?, in J. Sambor, J. Linde-Usienkiewicz, R. Huszcza (eds), Językoznawstwo synchroniczne i diachroniczne. Tom poświęcony pamięci Adama Weinsberga. Warszawa: Wydawnictwa Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego, 203-213.
  22. Nkollo M. (2002), L'actualisation des cas à l’exemple du comitatif français. Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego LV111, 121-135.
  23. Paduceva E.V. (2002), Diatezet i diaticeskij sdvig. Russian Linguistics 26 (2), 179-215.
  24. Plank F. (1999), Split morphology: how agglutination and flexion mix. Linguistic Typology 3 (3), 279-340.
  25. Scalise S. (1988), Inflection and derivation. Linguistics 26 (4), 561-581.
  26. Spencer A. (2000), Inflection and the Lexeme. Acta Linguistica Hungarica XL VIT (1-4), 335-344.
  27. Williams E, (1981), On the Notions "lexically related“ and "head of word". Linguistic Inquiry 12 (2), 245-274.
  28. Wójcik P. (2000), The Acquisition of Lithuanian Verb Morphology. A case study. Kraków: Uniwersytet Warszawski (Katedra Językoznawstwa Ogólnego i Baltystyki) - Universilas.