Abstract
The paper (Baker & Gondo 2020) studies several issues in Dan morphosyntax: the formal differences between verbs, nouns and adjectives; two types of possessive constructions (with alienable and inalienable head nouns) and their syntactic structures; the derivation of nouns from verbs and adjectives; low and high nominalization; and possessive constructions with deverbal and deadjectival nouns. As it turns out, Baker & Gondo’s analyses are incorrect in some major points: the key formal differences between verbs, adjectives and nouns have been left unnoticed due to disregard for Dan tonal morphology, and for the same reason, the tonal marking of the high nominalization has also been ignored. Baker & Gondo’s syntactic analysis of the possessive construction with alienable nouns as analogous to the Saxon genitive (king’s house) cannot be accepted; in fact, it can be compared with the genitive construction seen in English the house of the king. Possessive constructions with deverbal and deadjectival nouns are not as radically opposed as one may think after reading Baker & Gondo’s paper; in fact, a noun derived from an intransitive verb can sometimes appear as an alienable noun with respect to its theme, and, conversely, a deadjectival noun can appear as a relational noun with respect to the modified noun.
Highlights
In mainstream general linguistics, there is a tendency to regard descriptive studies of individual languages as a second-grade task subordinate to the main job, which is that of theoretical interpretation
It will be shown that possessive constructions both with and without possessive marker ɓa are possible for deadjectival nouns; the main factor in the distribution of these two types of constructions is apparently the agentivity of the possessor
In the introduction to (Baker & Gondo 2020) it is said that the Dan dialect under study is that of Man: “see Gondo (2016) for the first extended study of the Man dialect, which we investigate here”
Summary
There is a tendency to regard descriptive studies of individual languages as a second-grade task subordinate to the main job, which is that of theoretical interpretation. A survey of the paper by Baker & Gondo will be given and its main ideas will be recapitulated (section 3). It will be shown that possessive constructions both with and without possessive marker ɓa are possible for deadjectival nouns; the main factor in the distribution of these two types of constructions is apparently the agentivity of the possessor This factor seems to be valid for possessive constructions with deverbal nouns.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
