Article published in:Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba Conference
Edited by Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány
[Approaches to Hungarian 14] 2015
► pp. 121–145
The morphosyntax of (in)alienably possessed noun phrases
The Hungarian contribution
This paper argues that there is a fundamental difference between alienable and inalienable possession in the syntax of the noun phrase, and that this difference involves direction of predication. A possessum is the subject of a predicate that is or contains the possessor; the configurational relationship between the possessive predicate and its subject is established by a relator that takes the possessum either as its specifier or as its complement, with the possessive predicate occupying the other position in the small clause. Alienably possessed noun phrases involve an underlying syntax in which the possessum is the relator’s specifier; inalienable possession constructions are built on a structure in which the possessum is the complement of the relator. The paper provides an analytical sketch of a partial typology of possessed noun phrases and an account of the cross-linguistic generalisation that for languages that show a systematic structural distinction between alienable and inalienable adnominal possession, it is the inalienably possessed noun phrase that is morphosyntactically simpler than the alienably possessed one. The focus of the discussion is on Hungarian, a language whose ‘possessedness marker’ -(j)a/-(j)e is teased apart into two component parts: an affixal ‘spurious’ article -a/e lexicalising the relator of DP-internal possession, and an additional -j- that in noun phrases that show a morphological alienability split has morphemic status, functioning as the linker that facilitates the Predicate Inversion derivation of alienably possessed noun phrases.
Published online: 03 June 2015
Cited by other publications
Alberti, Gábor & Judit Farkas
den Dikken, Marcel
Farkas, Judit & Gábor Alberti
Hegedüs, Veronika & Éva Dékány
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 december 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
Bennis, Hans, Norbert Corver & Marcel den Dikken
Dikken, Marcel den
Dikken, Marcel den & Anikó Lipták
Dikken, Marcel den, Anikó Lipták & Zsófia Zvolenszky
Gerland, Doris & Albert Ortmann
2012 What counts as relational in Hungarian, Uralic and beyond? CTF 2012, Düsseldorf.
2008 Syntactic universals and usage frequency, 3: Alienable vs. inalienable possessive constructions. Handout, Leipzig Spring School on Linguistic Diversity.
Heine, Bernd & Kézié Lébikaza
Larson, Richard & Franc Marušić
Napoli, Donna Jo
2010 Hungarian phonology and morphology: Discord in the possessive allomorphy of Hungarian. MA thesis, ELTE.
Rácz, Péter & Péter Rebrus
2009 Alienable and inalienable possession in Hungarian. Paper presented at New Trends in Uralistics , Szeged, 3–5 September 2009. Earlier version published as ‘Az elidegeníthető és az elidegeníthetetlen birtoklás kifejezésmódjairól’, in Nyelvtudomány I (2005). 155–169.