| Abstract: | The present paper considers the affixes -lʕ (LH), -jo-lqəl (JQ), which derive agentive/patientive nouns, -ɣiŋ (GN), which derive action nouns, and ɣe-/ɣa- (GA) and n- (N), which derive adjectival participles in Koryak, and examines the morphological and syntactic differences, as well as similarities between them. It also explores the features and meanings common to these seemingly unrelated forms when becoming predicates in the main clause. Consequently, the following conclusions were drawn. (1) LH, JQ, and GN inflect according to cases and become an argument, while GA and N cannot. However, they all receive number and person markings like ordinary nouns. In this respect, they are all nominals. (2) When these forms become a predicate in the main clause, LH, JQ, and GN represent evaluative modalities such as non-permission, schedule, and obligation. GA represents ‘fact predication,’ which sees events as fixed facts that are not limited to time, and N represents ‘property predication,’ which denotes the permanent attributes of things. (3) In fact, these seemingly unrelated meanings, such as the evaluative modality, fact predication, and property predication, are all common in that they all capture events as fixed and time-stable phenomena that are not limited to time. In this respect, they are in opposition with ‘event predication,’ which captures events in the flow of time. That is, it is considered that these nominal forms, such as LH, JQ, GN, GA, and N, complement the semantic areas that cannot be covered by the event prediction expressed by finite verbs. |
