Abstract
In this paper, we test the hypothesis that possessive pronouns have the same basic structure containing the genitive pronoun, plus, in some languages, some extra structure, as suggested by Caha (2009). In order to unravel the structure of these pronouns, we use the same logic applied by Caha (2009) and Bobaljik (2012) that excludes so-called ABA-patterns. If possessive pronouns are built on top of the genitive, we derive several predictions.First, we predict that there are languages in which the possessive pronoun comprises the genitive pronoun plus an extra affix (complex morphology). Furthermore, we predict that there are no possessive pronouns that have the same form as the accusative, or the nominative pronoun, to the exclusion of the genitive (*ABA). And thirdly, we expect that any syncretisms between possessives and other pronominal forms respect the proposed hierarchy in the sense that only structurally adjacent forms may be syncretic.Our data provide ample evidence for the claim that possessive pronouns are “bigger” structures than the accusative or ergative pronouns, suggesting that the possessives are indeed constructed from these structures. However, the data in our sample do not give crucial evidence for the claim that the possessives are more complex than the genitive. The data leave open the possibility that the genitive is in fact “bigger” than the possessive. Only in a few languages do we find ABA-patterns. We argue that these ABA-patterns are only apparent counterexamples to the proposed structure. Therefore, we conclude that there is broad typological evidence for the hypothesis that possessives are built from pronouns expressing a dependent (accusative/ergative) case.
Highlights
Consider the pronominal paradigm in Dutch (1), where shaded cells indicate syncretisms within the columns
Given the formal correspondence between the possessive pronoun and the accusative form of the pronoun in first and second person, there is reason to believe that the possessive is somehow related to the accusative and that it belongs to the same paradigm as the other forms of the pronoun
We investigate the question whether the possessive pronoun can be considered part of the pronominal paradigm, and if so, how it is related to the other forms of the personal pronoun
Summary
Consider the pronominal paradigm in Dutch (1), where shaded cells indicate syncretisms within the columns. The starting point of our investigation is a suggestion made by Caha (2009) who proposes that possessive pronouns are built from the genitive – in some languages with some extra structure – but not from a more complex case (such as the dative or any other “bigger” cases) or simpler case (such as the accusative or the nominative). The possessive consists of this syncretic pronoun preceded by the marker khòòng (3 indicating the tone), that in its bare form means ‘things, stuff’ In this case, the possessive is overtly marked by some extra nominal morphology on top of the accusative/genitive. In order to account for this, we assume that in this particular example, the extra “possessive” morphology (see the structure in (5)) triggers spell out by a suppletive form that realizes the complex structure including the genitive, a situation similar to what we see in the Old English first person (7). Before we get to this, let us first go into the details of our study
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
