This study aims to contribute to the grammatical description of Xitsonga, an often-neglected language in Bantu linguistics. Drawing theoretical insights from comparative Bantu linguistics, such as Hyman’s (2003) Causative-Applicative-Reciprocal-Passive template hereafter abbreviated as CARP and Cocchi’s (2009) grouping criteria of verbal extensions into syntactic and lexical categories, the study’s main focus is on the descriptive analysis of the verbal extensions and their impact on the form and morpho-syntactic structure of Xitsonga. The study is essentially descriptive but with theoretical and applied implications for the documentation of Xitsonga and comparative Bantu linguistics. The study draws on Bantu typology and comparative studies, and those on morphology and syntax, and verbal extensions in particular, as a way to bring to light new theoretical insights about Xitsonga and thus contribute to the appreciation and development of the language.  The ten affixes, namely the causative, the applicative, the passive, the reciprocal, the reversive, the intensive, the neuter, the stative, the iterative, and the persistive have been individually described, analysed and then compounded. On the nature and function of the aforementioned verbal extensions in Xitsonga, the study found that there are extensions that maintain, those that decrease, and also the ones that increase valency. Specifically, the study found that the reciprocal, reversive and intensive maintain valency as they neither increase nor decrease the number of arguments. On the other hand, the passive, reflexive, stative and neuter reduce valency or the number of arguments. In contrast, the causative, applicative, persistive and iterative are found to be highly productive as they introduce new arguments. Furthermore, the study examined whether verbal extensions should be seen as inflectional or derivational. Verbal extensions are derivational as they derive new meanings of the root or stem to which they are attached while inflectional mark number, voice, tense/aspect and mood. On the question of the extent, Xitsonga's verbal extensions can be grouped into syntactic and lexical.  Based on the criteria proposed by Cocchi (2009) the study found that the reversive, reflexive and stative would be categorised as lexical due to their non-effect on the argument structure. This is true of the intensive, reciprocal and iterative as they all maintain valency. In contrast, the neuter and the passive would fall under syntactic as they both reduce the number of arguments. On the other hand, the causative, applicative and persistive would also be categorized as syntactic as they increase the number of arguments. The study also analyses the productivity of verbal suffixes and their co-occurrences. In terms of the co-occurrences, the analysis is done using both the descriptive analysis as well as Hyman’s (2003) CARP template. In Xitsonga most co-occurrences are accounted for by the CARP template although some violate it. The ones that adhere to CARP are the most used in the language. The CAUS-APPL, CAUS-RECIP, RECIP-CAUS, APPL-RECIP, APPL-PASS, REFLEX-APPL and REFLEX-CAUS are the most common co-occurrences in Xitsonga. The major contribution to scholarship is the study represents the most systematic and comprehensive account of the Xitsonga morphological and syntactic structure, focusing on the scope and range of verbal extensions, and their combinations. The study contributes to the advancement and documentation of the Xitsonga language in both its spoken and written forms. This contribution transcends national borders, encompassing similar language varieties spoken in Mozambique, Zimbabwe, and Swaziland. The acquired knowledge holds potential for educational, literacy, and socio-economic development applications among the language speakers. Furthermore, the study's insights and findings can serve as a basis for comparative microvariation analysis between Xitsonga and related language varieties and macrovariation within the broader context of Bantu languages.