[Lingtyp] Contents of Lingtyp digest , Vol 89, Issue 1: Phonological differences of alienable vs. inalienable, possession

[Sebastian Löbner]

A semantic explanation for the observed asymmetry between the marking 
(if distinguished) of adnominal inalienable vs alienable possession is 
proposed in my Theory of Concept Types and Determination (CTD, Löbner 
2011). According to CTD, inalienable possession occurs with relational 
nouns. This type of noun is congruent (unmarked) with possessive 
determination since the noun concept contains a relational argument that 
is in need of specification in a “possessive” construction. 
Nonrelational nouns lack such an argument and are hence congruent with 
absolute determination. For the use with possessive determination, a 
nonrelational noun concept needs to be accommodated with a relational 
argument. The process may be expressed by extra morphosyntactic marking 
in addition to mere possessor specification.

For a typological survey in this framework, see Ortmann (2018); for a 
study of the observed split in Hungarian, Ortmann & Gerland (2014)

Löbner (2011) /Concept types and determination. /doi 10.1093/jos/ffq022
Ortmann & Gerland (2014) /She loves you, -ja -ja -ja: objective 
conjugation and pragmatic possession in Hungaria/n. doi 
10.1515/9783110720075-011 <https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110720075-011>
Ortmann (2018)/Connecting the typology and semantics of nominal 
possession: alienability splits and the morphology–semantics interface/ 
10.1007/s11525-017-9319-6

Sebastian Löbner
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220203/6ef3b5f2/attachment.htm>