Mugane (1997) identifies two types of individual-denoting nominalizations in Gĩkũyũ (Bantu): the [mu… a]-type and the [mu… i]-type. He argues that the [mu… i]-type nominalizations are phrasal and that the [mu… a]-type nominalizations exhibit a puzzling nature, displaying both lexical and syntactic properties. This study examines Mugane’s characterization, revisiting the notion of a lexicon-syntax divide. Applying Wood’s (2023) Complex Head analysis, I demonstrate that we can explain the [mu… a]-type nominalizations within a syntactic framework without resorting to the lexicon. The analysis reveals that the puzzle is resolvable and that syntax can account for both types of nominalizations in Gĩkũyũ.
