Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The Gutnish-specific si -passive combines be or become with a participle, directly followed by the element si . Unlike regular periphrastic passives, si -passives focus on the process rather than the result, opening up the construction for unergatives, which are unattested in the regular type. However, si -passives are quite limited when it comes to the subject. Internal arguments can only become subjects if they strand a preposition or a particle. Otherwise, the subject is expletive. I argue that si is part of the participle ending in Asp o , where its phi-features block agreement with the internal argument, trapping it in situ and depriving Asp o of a link to the result of the event. Originally a reflexive, si was reanalysed as a marker of the participle rather than the infinitive in contexts where conjugational changes had made them ambiguous. These changes never affected Fårö, where the si -passive is thus correctly predicted to be absent.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Erik Magnusson Petzell (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: