Reflexive verb

The "true" (literal) reflexive denotes that the agent is simultaneously the patient. The verb is typically transitive and can be used in non-reflexive meaning as well.

"Reciprocal" reflexive denotes that the agents perform the mutual actions among themselves, as in English constructions using "each other". In most cases, the transitive verbs are also used.

In modern Scandinavian languages, the passive (or more properly mediopassive) voice is used for medial, especially reciprocal, constructions. Some examples from Danish are:

Maria og Peter skændes; "Mary and Peter are bickering", lit. "Mary and Peter are scolded by each other."

Maria og Peter blev forlovet; "Mary and Peter got engaged [to each other]."

(The hypothetical form **kysses (kiss each other) is not often—if ever—seen in Danish; however, it will likely be understood by most native speakers, indicating that the mediopassive voice is still at the very least potentially productive in Danish. An expression like "de kysses uafladeligt" (they kiss each other all the time) could very well be used for humorous purposes.)

"Autocausative" reflexive denotes that the (usually animate) "referent represented by the subject combines the activity of actor and undergoes a change of state as a patient":[8]

"Anticausative" reflexive denotes that the (usually inanimate) subject of the verb undergoes an action or change of state whose agent is unclear or nonexistent.[8]

"Intransitive" forms (also known as "impersonal reflexive" or "mediopassive") are obtained by attaching the reflexive pronoun to intransitive verbs. The grammatical subject is either omitted (in pro-drop languages) or is a dummy pronoun (otherwise). Thus, those verbs are defective, as they have only the 3rd person singular (masculine or neuter, depending on language) form.

In Slavic languages, practically "the only condition is that they can be construed as having a human agent. The applied human agent can be generic, or loosely specified collective or individual."[9]

In many cases, there is a semantic overlap between impersonal/anticausative/autocausative constructs and the passive voice (also present in all Romance and Slavic languages).[9] On one hand, impersonal reflexive constructs have a wider scope of application, as they are not limited to transitive verbs like the canonical passive voice. On the other hand, those constructs can have slight semantic difference or markedness.

"Inherent" or "pronominal" (inherently or essentially) reflexive verbs lack the corresponding non-reflexive from which they can be synchronically derived.[8] In other words, se is an inherent part of an unergative reflexive or reciprocal verb with no meaning of its own, and an obligatory part of the verb's lexical entry":[10]

In Guugu Yimithirr (a member of the Pama-Nyungan language family) reflexivity can combine with past (PST), nonpast (NPST), and imperative (IMP) tense marking to form the verbal suffixes: /-dhi/ (REFL+PST), /-yi/ (REFL+NPST) and /-ya/ (REFL+IMP) respectively. See the following example where the verb waarmbal, a transitive verb meaning 'send back' is detransitivized to mean 'return' taking only one nominal argument with an agentive role:

The same valence-reduction process occurs for the transitive wagil 'cut'

In each of these cases, the reflexively inflected verb now forms a new stem to which additional morphology may be affixed, for example waarmba-adhi 'returned' may become waarmba-adhi-lmugu (return-REFL+PST-NEG) 'didn't return.' As with many Pama–Nyungan languages, however, verbs in the lexicon belong to conjugation classes, and a verbs class may restrict the ease with which it can be reflexive.

These reflexive morphemes are largely employed for expressing reciprocity as well; however, in cases where there is potential ambiguity between a reflexive and a reciprocal interpretation, Guugu Yimithirr has an additional means for emphasizing the reflexive (i.e., by the agent upon the agent) interpretation: namely, the /-gu/ suffix upon the grammatical subject. See for example the following contrast between the reciprocal and reflexive:

Another Pama–Nyungan language, Gumbaynggir has a verbal suffix /-iri/ to mark reciprocity and de-transitive transitive verbs e.g.

As with Guugu Yimithirr, Kuuk Thaayorre, a Paman language, has some ambiguity between reflexive and reciprocal morphemes and constructions. Ostensibly, there are two suffixes /-e/ and /-rr/ for reflexivity and reciprocity respectively; however, in practice it is less clear cut. Take for example the presence of the reciprocal suffix in what should seem like a simple reflexive example.

Or the reverse wherein an apparent reciprocal assertion has reflexive morphology:

In actuality, the broader function of the reciprocal verb is to emphasize the agentively of the grammatical subject(s), sometimes to directly counteract expectations of an external agent--as in the first example above. The combination of the reciprocal verb with the reflexive pronoun highlights the notion that the subject acted highly agentively (as in a mutual/symmetric reciprocal event) but was also the undergoer of their own action (as in a reflexive event where agentively is backgrounded e.g. "I soiled myself").

Conversely, the reflexive verb can have precisely this function of backgrounding the agentively of the subject and bringing the focus to the effect that was wrought upon the undergoer(s) as in the second example above.

"The door opened" is expressed in Hungarian as "Az ajtó kinyílt", from the verb kinyílik, while the passive voice is rare and archaic. There are numerous verb pairs where one element is active and the other expresses middle voice, something happening apparently on its own, rendered in English like "to become, get, grow, turn" (something). See also the grammatical voice of Hungarian verbs and the Wiktionary entries of -ul/-ül, -ódik/-ődik and -odik/-edik/-ödik, three suffix groups that form such verbs.