I think you would normally call this descriptively a _deverbal noun_
or _deverbal nominalization_. It is quite well known to us German
speakers because our orthography makes a big fuzz about
nominalizations (and nouns).
An interesting case are pairs that differ in stress, e.g. _conflíct –
cónflict_, or in final consonant voice, e.g. _use [juuz] – use
Those pages certainly give examples of the observed; however, they do not
classify things very well (at least relative to my thought process). The
descriptions include agent and patient forms, along with gerunds which
(while they are obviously deverbal nouns), are not examples of the deverbal
noun class described. Then again, might this not be a specific
nominalization at all, but rather just my accidentally identifying a set of
deverbal nouns that all have some similar morpho-synto-semantic qualities?
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 8:13 PM, William Wright <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> This is a very interesting question. Upon reading it, I thought there
> *must* be a term for this... but I can't find it. I checked a few
> different lists of terms for thematic relations (Wikipedia has one:
> but nothing seems to fit exactly.
> "Resultative" as a linguistics term already refers to something
> slightly different- a predicate that indicates the end state after a
> change, like the word "red" in "I painted the barn red". But it is not
> used for a "thing" that is created by the action. The thing that
> undergoes the change of state (or, more generally, the thing that is
> affected by an event) is the patient. I suppose that "being brought
> into existence" would count as an effect, and so such things would be
> covered under the terminology of "patient". "Resistance" and
> "existence" seem to come from Latin passive participles (actual
> speakers of Latin please correct me if I'm wrong about that bit of
> etymology), which lends support to that analysis as well.
> So, "patient nominal" is probably an appropriate standard-terminology
> hypernym for what you want. But I can't figure out a more specific
> My only criticism for "patient-nominal" is that it isn't really a patient
> because the thing described doesn't *undergo* the action of the verb. If
> you look at the sentence "They resist assimilation", the patient
> ("assimilation") actually undergoes the action of the verb (that is, the
> "assimilation" is resisted); however, the "resistance" that must exist
> since something is resisting something else does not undergo the action of
> the verb (the "resistance" is not resisted). "Resistance" is almost what
> the verb is in and of itself.
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 12:01 PM, Thomas Ruhm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> In Berbice Dutch the resultative is form is expressed with the auxiliary
>> verb 'kon' or 'ko'. But I don't understand how to use it. The negarive form
>> is 'noko'.
>> en, twe/tɛ, dri, firi, fefu, seʃi, sewn, akti, negn, tin
> William S. Wright
William S. Wright