SOME REMARKS ON THE TAGALOG NAKA- STATIVE AND ITS KAPAMPANGAN COUNTERPART Marly Vea Clarisse Elli 1. Introduction It has been known that the Philippine grammar has been a challenge to the universal grammar when it comes to the concept of precategoriality, in which Tagalog full words are neither truly nouns nor truly verbs (Himmelmann, 1991). This means that you cannot determine the lexical category of a word, if it is a noun, a verb, or an adjective, unless given an appropriate marking in terms of referential functions. ‘Statives’ have overlapping features with nouns, verbs, and adjectives. They are a subclass of verbs that adopt the voice affixes of prototypical verbs but modify nouns rather than express actions. They function grammatically as verbs, and semantically as adjectives (Hipolito and Santos, 2014). Eventives are also called dynamic verbs or potentive verbs. In Tagalog, statives are eventualities which principally exclude the involvement of an agentive argument, while potentives include an agentive argument which however lacks control. Most of the eventualities requiring potentive forms in Tagalog are being expressed by statives, which is why the two overlap and assert ambiguity (Himmelmann, 2006). Statives occur in different forms – affixed, and unaffixed. These forms are also being used in Eventive verbs. The most common form is the affixed ma-form, followed by forms with the transitive affix-in, both the intransitive affix m- and the transitive affix –in, maka-forms, nakaka-forms, mapag-forms, mapagpa-forms, and mapagma-forms. Stative verbs are subclassed into verbs of perception, stance or physical position, cognition, emotion, sensation, reasoning, and mental attitude and relations. 1.1 Statement of the Problem This paper aims to focus on the positional function of Tagalog naka- statives and withdraw conclusions based on the derivations of affixes, and its Kapampangan counterpart. It aims to answer the following questions: (1) Does Tagalog naka- statives come from the affix paka- or maka-?;