It is supposed that there are two allomorphs of the reflexive suffix and also two allomorphs of the
passive suffix in Sakha. Contrary to this traditional explanation, this paper provides a new analysis:
The author argues that the reflexive, the anticausative, and the passive suffixes should be
distinguished as distinct morphemes.
The reflexive suffix and the anticausative suffix show semantic differences as well as
morphophonological, morphotactic, and syntactic differences in a consistent way. The
anticausative suffix and the passive suffix should be distinguished since impersonal passive
constructions are possible only with the passive suffix.
Turkic languages have a cognate reflecive suffix -(i)n in common. Judging from their
behavior, however, it is not the reflexive suffix but the anticausative suffix that is similar to the
reflexive suffix of most other Turkic languages.