Cover not available
Part of
Possession in Languages of Europe and North and Central Asia
Edited by Lars Johanson, Lidia Federica Mazzitelli and Irina Nevskaya
[Studies in Language Companion Series 206] 2019
► pp. 7–26

Expressing ‘possession’

Motivations, meanings, and forms

 | James Cook University , Australia
Competing motivations are often at work in the choice of form and meaning of possessive and associative noun phrases. The article offers a broad typological review of the ways of expressing possession at the NP-internal level. In particular, it discusses how iconicity and economic motivations interact in determining the shape of NP-internal possessive expressions, also addressing the topics of how socio-cultural factors affect the grammar of possession and how societal changes are reflected in language variation.
Keywords: adnominal possession, possession and association, iconicity, economic motivation, socio-cultural motivation
Article outline
  • 1.Possession, ownership, and association
  • 2.Forms and meanings in possessive constructions: Iconic and economic motivation
    • 2.1Iconic motivation in expressing possession: Some examples
    • 2.2Iconic motivation and the specificity of a noun referent
    • 2.3Economic motivation in possessive constructions
    • 2.4The special status of speech act participants
    • 2.5Non-possessive meanings in possessive constructions
  • 3.How the expression of possession reflects societal practices
  • 4.Summary
  • Acknowledgements
  • Abbreviations
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 5 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.206.02aik
References (41)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2012. The Languages of the Amazon. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2013. Possession and ownership in cross-linguistic perspective. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 1–64.Google Scholar
2015. Differential case in Yalaku. Oceanic Linguistics 54: 241–270. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Dixon, R. M. W. (eds). 2013. Possession and Ownership: A Cross-linguistic Typology. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Ameka, Felix K. 1996. Body parts in Ewe grammar. In The Grammar of Inalienability. A Typological Perspective on Body Part Terms and the Whole-part Relation, Hilary Chappell & William A. McGregor (eds), 783–840. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
2013. Possessive constructions in Likpe (Skplé). In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 224–242.Google Scholar
Boas, Franz & Deloria, Ella. 1941. Dakota Grammar. Washington DC: US Govt. Print. Office.Google Scholar
Dench, Alan. 2013. Possession in Martuthunira. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 26–48.Google Scholar
Dixon, R. M. W. 2005. A Semantic Approach to English Grammar, 2nd edn. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
2010. Basic Linguistic Theory, Volume (II): Grammatical Topics. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Enfield, Nicholas J. 2004. Ethnosyntax: Introduction. In Ethnosyntax. Explorations in Grammar and Culture, N J. Enfield (ed.), 3–30. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ersen-Rasch, Margarete I. 2012. Türkische Grammatik. Ausführlich und verständlich. Lehrstufen A1 bis C2. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz.Google Scholar
Gerland, Doris. 2014. Definitely not possessed? Possessive suffixes with definiteness marking function. In Frames and Concept Types. Applications in Language and Philosophy, Thomas Gamerschlag, Doris Gerland, Rainer Osswald & Wiebke Petersen (ed.), 269–292. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gravelle, Gloria J. 2013. Possession in Moskona, an East Bird’s Head language. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 90–106.Google Scholar
Guérin, Valérie. 2017. The Oceanic subgroup of the Austronesian language family. In The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon, 911–941. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haiman, John. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59: 781–819. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1985. Natural Syntax. Iconicity and Erosion. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession. Cognitive Sources, Forces and Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. The body in language: Observations from grammaticalization. In The Body in Language. Comparative Studies of Linguistic Embodiment, Matthias Brenzinger & Iwona Kraska-Szlenk (eds), 13–32. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Jensen, Cheryl. 1999. Tupí-Guaraní. In The Amazonian Languages, R. M. W. Dixon & Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald (eds.), 125–164. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The Philosophy of Grammar. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 2002. Structural Factors in Turkic Language Contacts. Richmond: Curzon.Google Scholar
. 2013. Isomorphic processes: Grammaticalization and copying of grammatical elements. In Shared Grammaticalization. With Special Focus on the Transeurasian Languages [Studies in Language Companion Series 132], Martine Robbeets & Hubert Cuyckens (eds), 101–109. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichtenberk, František. 2008. A Grammar of Toqabaqita, Vol. 1. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Luo, Yongxian. 2013. Possessive constructions in Mandarin Chinese. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 186–207.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics, Vol. 2. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Maslova, Elena. 2003. A Grammar of Kolyma Yukaghir. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michael, Lev. 2013. Possession in Nanti. In Aikhenvald & Dixon (eds), 149–166.Google Scholar
Mosel, Ulrike. 1984. Tolai Syntax and its Historical Development. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.Google Scholar
Nevskaya, Irina. 2005. Prostranstvennye otnoshenia v tjurkskikh jazykakh Juzhnoj Sibiri (na materiale shorskogo jazyka). Novosibisrk: Rossijskaja Akademija Nauk (Sibirskoe otdelenie).Google Scholar
. 2008. Depictive secondary predicates in South Siberian Turkic. In Secondary Predicates in Eastern European Languages and Beyond [Studia Slavica Oldenburgensia 16], Christoph Schroeder, Gerd Hentschel & Winfried Boeder (eds), 275–295. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag der Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg.Google Scholar
Nevskaya, Irina & Tazhibaeva, Saule. 2017. Kazakh hypocorisms in a comparative perspective. Turkic Languages 21: 234–348.Google Scholar
Pasch, Helma. 1986. Die Mba-Sprachen. Die Nominalklassensysteme und die genetische Gliederung einer Gruppe von Ubangi Sprachen. Hamburg: Helmut Buske.Google Scholar
Rubin, Aaron D. 2010. The development of the Amharic definite article and an Indonesian parallel. Journal of Semitic Studies LVII: 103–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlesinger, Michel. 1928. Satzlehre der aramäischen Sprache des babylonischen Talmuds. Leipzig: Asia Major.Google Scholar
Schokkin, Dineke. 2014. A Grammar of Paluai, the Language of Baluan Island, Papua New Guinea. PhD dissertation, James Cook University.Google Scholar
Sneddon, James N. 1996. Indonesian Reference Grammar. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Ullrich, Charles. 2008. New Lakota Dictionary. Bloomington IN: Lakota Language Consortium.Google Scholar
de Vries, Lourens. 2006. Areal pragmatics of New Guinea: Thematization, distribution and recapitulative linkage in Papuan narratives. Journal of Pragmatics 38: 811–826. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Waltisberg, Michael. 2011. Syntactic typology of Semitic. In Semitic Languages: An International Handbook, Stefan Weninger (ed.), 303–329 Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Waltke, Bruce K. & O’Connor, Michael Patrick. 1990. An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. Winona Lake IN: Eisenbrauns.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Berg, Thomas
2022. The iconicity of possessive-affix position in Malayo-Polynesian. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 9:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2021. Removing the Owner: Non‐Specified Possessor Marking in Arawak Languages*. Studia Linguistica 75:2 ► pp. 175 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 december 2024. 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.