[Lingtyp] Phonological differences of alienable vs. inalienable possession

[Anvita Abbi]

Dear Marie-Luise,
The Great Andamanese language makes a distinction between alienable and
inalienable on the one hand and within that inanimate and animate
distinction. Thus, a body part is inalienable but in case it is a cut-up
part of an animal the possessive marker is prefixed with the phoneme /t/.
For example, *ra er=cho *'pig's head' but *ra t-er=cho *'pig's head
(cut-up). For details, you may look up my paper in *Studies in Language *2011
'Body division in Great Andamanese*'. 739-92. *You may also
lookup by Anvita Abbi *A Grammar of the Great Andamanese Language. An
Ethnolinguistic Study.* 2013. Brill.
Hope this helps
Anvita Abbi


On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 6:10 AM Marie-Luise Popp <
marie_luise.popp at uni-leipzig.de> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I'm looking for languages, in which alienable and inalienable possession
> is marked by the same set (or at least - phonologically similar)
> exponents, yet do these exponents undergo different phonological
> processes in alienable vs. inalienable possession.
>
> In Ojibwe, for example, vowel hiatus is resolved via consonant
> epenthesis in alienable possession, but via deletion in inalienable
> possession.
>
> If anyone knows of more languages of this type, I would be grateful for
> references and comments.
>
> Best,
>
> Luise (Leipzig University)
>
>
> --
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20220130/9a7d5456/attachment.htm>