This analysis examines antipassivisation in Frisian and Dutch, revealing distinctions in grammatical constructions.
The Germanic languages are usually listed among the languages without an antipassive voice. In this paper I will discuss two constructions that have antipassive-like properties. The first one is object-into-verb incorporation in Frisian. That has been studied fairly thoroughly, but never in the frame of antipassivisation. The second construction has never been described in any structural frame. It is the 'van ... -burg/-stein' construction in Dutch, that allows nearly all verbs as input and deletes the object from all transitive verbs, thus classifying it as a potential antipassive. I will discuss both constructions in the light of the ongoing attempts to reach a working definition on antipassivity and I will briefly compare the verbal semantics in both constructions to those of so-called 'natural antipassives', in order to determine how antipassive-like they both are. I conclude that Frisian incorporation fails to meet the defining criteria to be classified as an antipassive voice, and that the Dutch construction does meet those.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Henk Wolf (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: