Nkollo Mikołaj, Inflection and derimtion in verbal morphology: a borderline case from agglutinative languages. Studia Romanica Posnaniensia, Adam Mickiewicz University Press, Poznań, voI. The present paper focuses on the Hnguistic 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

more »

... on. 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 Ume. The reason of this compatibility lies in merely derivational (non-categorial) naturę of causative modifiers in verbal morphology of Kazakh language. The distinction between inflectional and derivational morphology has stimulated the interest of scholars sińce the foundation of modem linguistics in the early 20* century. This tendency is still present in hnguistic textbooks as well as in theoretical discussions held only in a restncted circle of morphologists. So strong a commitment to this matter seems to be a proof of its vital importance. The separation between the two fields of research in ąuestion is crucial when a decision conceraing the number of lexical entries to be put in a dictionary has to be made. The linguists agree that inflectional changes produce the paradigm of a single lexeme. Hence, they are not conducive to several distinct lexical items. This explains why the forms animal and animals, or / and me are not allotted separate entries. Since each of the above forms represents an inflectional extension of the basie word, their individual treatment would be unproductive. It is also widely recognized that variable lexical items are carriers of categorial values discemible in a given part of speech. These values are expressed by means of 394 M. Nkollo inflectional morphemes. The latter are, therefore, obligatory components of every occurrence of the word susceptible to be varied. For example, Polish nouns are bound to convey Information about the case, as well as number (Bańko, 2002: 142-148). In derivational morphology, the affixes, when combined with a root, aiways produce a new lexical item {sect and sectarian, to close and to disdose, canto and cantito, etc). The result of such a combination can be, in its own way, inflectionally modified. The conclusion to be drawn from these examples is that a root and the word we derive from it cannot be considered to represent two paradigmatic variants descending from a single lexeme (Nagórko, 1993:206). Hence, a lexicographer shouid insert such pairs of words into two separate dictionary slots. The present discussion aims at shedding a new light on the fuzzy boundary that separates two areas of Hnguistic research. The empirical materiał brought under analysis comes from Kazakh verbal morphology. Kazakh is an agglutinative language. Thus, in the conjugation, pieces of Information about particular values of such categories as number, person, voice and tense are transmitted separately. As for aspect and mood, they are expressed partially via inflectional endings, partially via auxiliary verbs and relevant participial forms. Finally, it shouid be borne in mind that Kazakh verbs can contain a separate morpheme serving to express negation {Ulbip^biMusdbi óys-óa «don't disturb us» as opposed to lUbip^biMbudbi 6Y3 «disturb us»). The same holds true of nominał inflection where case, number and possession have overt exponents and, hence, are neatly segmentable (i.e. are not realized cumulatively). This state of affairs is, therefore, qualitatively different from what we know about flexive languages such as Latin, Greek or Slavic where words marked for more than one category form an inextricable combination. In nominał morphology of these languages, a single ending dispenses simultaneously all necessary details conceming number, case and gender, as can easily be seen in Latin word civ-ibus «to the citizens». It is hard to say what is responsible, within the -ibus morpheme, for expression of dative, and plural (see the notion of «cumulative exponents», Matthews, 1991:179-181). The mergers of the same kind extend to conjugation in these languages, although several exceptions from this generał rułe do exist (Heinz, 1961:352). As said, the obligatory and recursive character comprises two main features of ' A certain confusion reigns in contemporary linguistics as to how the notion «inflection(al)» shouid be understood. This term designates primarily a branch of morphology opposite (but complementary) to derivation (or word-formation), irrespective of the type of language dealt with (analytic, isolating, alternating, etc). «Inflection» is meant here to refer to a set of phenomena that express different values of grammatical categories discernable in a given language. Furthermore, it is interpreted so as to account for the diversity of means used to convey Information about these categories. We treat as inflectional both bound (such as personal endings) and free morphemes (for example, auxiliary verbs). As A. Spencer (2(X)0:337) points out, inflection also embraces such exponents as word order, clitics, intonation, adpositions or combinations of these (see also Bańczerowski, 1999a:486-498 and for a slightly different point of view Wójcik, 2000:22-24).