Hubbry Logo
PossessivePossessiveMain
Open search
Possessive
Community hub
Possessive
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Possessive
Possessive
Possessive
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A possessive or ktetic form (abbreviated POS or POSS; from Latin: possessivus; Ancient Greek: κτητικός, romanized: ktētikós) is a word or grammatical construction indicating a relationship of possession in a broad sense. This can include strict ownership, or a number of other types of relation to a greater or lesser degree analogous to it.[1]

Most European languages feature possessive forms associated with personal pronouns, like the English my, mine, your, yours, his and so on. There are two main ways in which these can be used (and a variety of terminologies for each):

  • Together with a noun, as in my car, your sisters, his boss. Here the possessive form serves as a possessive determiner.
  • Without an accompanying noun, as in mine is red, I prefer yours, this book is his. A possessive used in this way is called a substantive possessive pronoun, a possessive pronoun or an absolute pronoun.

Some languages, including English, also have possessive forms derived from nouns or nominal phrases, such as Jane's, the cows' and nobody else's. These can be used in the same two ways as the pronoun-derived forms: Jane's office or that one is Jane's.

Possessives are sometimes regarded as a grammatical case (the possessive case), although they are also sometimes considered to represent the genitive case, or are not assigned to any case, depending on which language is being considered. On the other hand, some languages, such as the Cariban languages, can be said to have a possessed case, used to indicate the other party (the thing possessed) in a possession relationship. A similar feature found in some languages is the possessive affix, usually a suffix, added to the (possessed) noun to indicate the possessor, as in the Finnish taloni ("my house"), where talo means "house" and the suffix -ni means "my".

The concepts of possessive forms and genitive forms are sometimes conflated, although they are not exactly the same. The genitive form, which does not exist in modern English as a productive inflection outside of pronouns (see below), represents an of relationship, which may or may not be possessive; in other words, the possessive is a subset of genitive. For example, the genitive construction "speed of the car" is equivalent to the possessive form "the car's speed". However, the genitive construction "pack of dogs" is not the same as the possessive form "dogs' pack" (though it is the same as "dog pack", which is not possessive).

Formation

[edit]

From pronouns

[edit]

The personal pronouns of many languages correspond to both a set of possessive determiners and a set of possessive pronouns. For example, the English personal pronouns I, you, he, she, it, we and they correspond to the possessive determiners my, your, his, her, its, our and their and also to the (substantive) possessive pronouns mine, yours, his, hers, its (rare), ours and theirs. In some instances there is no difference in form between the determiner and the pronoun; examples include the English his (and its), and informal Finnish meidän (meaning either "our" or "ours").

In some languages, possessive determiners are subject to agreement with the noun they modify and possessive pronouns may be subject to agreement with their antecedent, in gender, number and case. For example, French has mon, ma, mes, respectively the masculine singular, feminine singular and plural forms corresponding to the English possessive determiner my, as well as the forms le mien, la mienne, les mien(ne)s corresponding to English possessive pronoun mine.

Since personal pronouns may also agree in number and gender with their own antecedent or referent, the possessive forms may consequently show agreement with either the "possessor" or the "possessed", or both. In French (and most other Romance languages) the third-person singular possessives do not indicate the gender of the possessor, instead they agree with the possessed (son, sa and ses can all mean "his", "her" or "its"). In Spanish the number is always indicated but the gender is only indicated for possessive pronouns, not possessive determiners; mi padre, mi madre, mis hermanos, mis hermanas (my father, my mother, my brothers, my sisters), but mío, mía, míos, mías when used as "mine" to refer to the previous. This contrasts with standard Dutch and English, where the form of the possessives (zijn, haar; his, her, its) indicates the grammatical or natural gender of the possessor, but does not depend on properties of the possessed. Additionally, German and several Dutch dialects[2] additionally inflect their possessives, thus giving agreement with both possessor and possessed; German has sein and ihr meaning "his" and "her" respectively, but these inflect to give (for example) feminine forms like seine and ihre, depending on the gender (and number and case) of the thing possessed.

In languages that have a genitive case, the possessive forms corresponding to pronouns may or may not resemble the genitive of those pronouns. For example, in Russian, the genitive of я ja "I" is меня menya ("of me"), whereas the corresponding possessive is мой moy ("my, mine", in masculine singular nominative form). In German the two sets of forms are quite similar (for example, the genitive of ich "I" is meiner, the corresponding possessive pronoun is also meiner in the masculine singular nominative, and the possessive determiner is mein with various endings).

Some languages have no distinct possessive determiners as such, instead using a pronoun together with a possessive particle – a grammatical particle used to indicate possession. For example, in Japanese, "my" or "mine" can be expressed as watashi no, where watashi means "I" and no is the possessive particle. Similarly in Mandarin Chinese, "my" or "mine" is wǒ de, where wǒ means "I" and de is the possessive particle.

An alternative to the pronominal possessive determiner, found in some languages, including Finnish and Hungarian, is the possessive affix, usually a suffix, attached to the noun denoting the thing possessed. For example, in Finnish the suffix -ni means "my", producing forms such as taloni ("my house"), from talo ("house"). Hungarian possessive suffixes are used in a similar way, as in háza ("his/her house"), formed from ház ("house"). In Hungarian this affix can also be used when the possessor is represented by a full noun, as described in the next section.

Pronouns other than personal pronouns, if they have possessive forms, are likely to form them in a similar way to nouns (see below). In English, for example, possessive forms derived from other pronouns include one's, somebody's and nobody's. There is however a distinct form whose[3] for the possessive of the interrogative and relative pronoun who; other languages may have similarly functioning words, such as the Russian чей chey ("whose?"). Another possessive found in Russian and other Slavic languages is the reflexive possessive, corresponding to the general reflexive pronoun; the Russian form is свой svoj (meaning "one's (own)", "my (own)", etc.).

From nouns

[edit]

In some languages, possessives can be formed from nouns or nominal phrases. In English, this is done using the ending -'s, as in Jane's, heaven's, the boy's, those young men's, or sometimes just an apostrophe, as in workers', Jesus', the soldiers'. Note that the ending can be added at the end of a noun phrase even when the phrase does not end with its head noun, as in the king of England's; this property inclines many linguists towards the view that the ending is a clitic rather than a case ending (see below, and further at English possessive).

In languages that have a genitive case, the genitive form of a noun may sometimes be used as a possessive (as in German Karls Haus "Karl's house"). Languages such as Japanese and Chinese form possessive constructions with nouns using possessive particles, in the same way as described for pronouns above. An example from Japanese is:

neko

cat

no

PTCL

iro

color

neko no iro

cat PTCL color

"the cat's color"

In other languages, noun possessives must be formed periphrastically, as in French la plume de ma tante ("my aunt's pen", literally "the pen of my aunt"). In Hungarian, the construction Mária háza is used ("Maria's house", literally "Maria her house", where the final -a in háza is the possessive suffix meaning "her"). The possessor noun can carry an additional dative marker, in which case an article appears before the noun. For example, "Peter's house" may be translated either as:

Péter

Peter

háza

his-house

Péter háza

Peter his-house

Péternek

of-Peter

a

the

háza

his-house

Péternek a háza

of-Peter the his-house

Syntax

[edit]

Possessive determiners are used in combination with a noun, playing the role of a determiner or attributive adjective. In English and some other languages, the use of such a word implies the definite article. For example, my car implies the car that belongs to me or is used by me; it is not correct to precede possessives with an article (*the my car) or other definite determiner such as a demonstrative (*this my car), although they can combine with quantifiers in the same ways that the can (all my cars, my three cars, etc.; see English determiners). This is not the case in all languages; for example in Italian the possessive is usually preceded by another determiner such as an article, as in la mia macchina ("my car", literally "the my car") or quel tuo libro ("that book of yours", literally "that your book").

Some languages place the possessive after the noun, as in Norwegian boka mi ("my book").[4] Here again the equivalent of the definite article – in this case the definite ending -a on the noun bok – is used in addition to the possessive. However, the forms min bok or mi bok, where the noun bok is in the indefinite form, are equally correct.

Possessive determiners may be modified with an adverb, as adjectives are, although not as freely or as commonly. Such modification is generally limited to such adverbs as more, less, or as much ... as (comparative) or mostly (superlative), for example in This is more my team than your team and This is mostly my team.

Substantive possessive pronouns are used on their own and cannot be used to describe a noun, playing the role of noun phrases, so mine may stand for "my cat", "my sister", "my things", etc. In some languages these may require articles or other determiners, as the French le mien etc. In English, the -'s possessives formed from nouns or noun phrases can be used in the same way; the president's may stand for "the president's office", "the president's policies", etc., as determined by the context.

A related use is that of the predicative expression, as in sentences like the book is mine. Here mine may be considered to be a predicate adjective (like red in the book is red) rather than a pronoun; in English, however, the same possessive form is used. Other languages may use differing forms; for example French may use ...est à moi for "...is mine".

A particular use of possessive pronouns and noun forms in English is that illustrated in phrases like a friend of mine and that coat of Fred's, used to form possessive expressions when the desired determiner is something other than the default the implied in the usual possessive determiner.

Terminology

[edit]

The terminology used for possessive words and phrases is not consistent among all grammarians and linguists.

What some authors refer to as possessives, others may call genitives, and vice versa. Nowadays, however, the term genitive is most commonly used in relation to languages with a developed case system (in which the "genitive case" often has a wider range of functions than merely forming possessives), while in languages like English, such words are usually called possessives rather than genitives. A given language may have distinct genitive and possessive forms, as in the example of Russian given above. (The English possessive in -'s is sometimes called the Saxon genitive; this alludes to its derivation from the genitive case that existed in Old English. It may also be called the prenominal genitive; this also applies to analogous forms in languages such as German.)

Words like the English my and your have traditionally been called possessive adjectives.[5][6] However, modern linguists note that they behave more like determiners rather than true adjectives (see examples in the § Syntax section above), and thus prefer the term possessive determiner. In some other languages, however, the equivalent words behave more like true adjectives (compare the Italian example above, for instance). While for most authors the term possessive pronoun is reserved (as in this article) for possessives like mine and yours that do not qualify an explicit noun,[7][8] the term is sometimes taken also to include all possessive forms that correspond to pronouns even though they behave as determiners.[9][10] Some authors who classify both sets of words as possessive pronouns or genitive pronouns apply the terms dependent/independent,[11] weak/strong[12] or adjectival/substantival to refer, respectively, to my, your, etc. and mine, yours, etc. Thus my is termed a dependent (or weak or adjectival) possessive pronoun, while mine is an independent (or strong or substantival) possessive pronoun.

According to the OED,[13] the first reference to possessive pronouns is found in 1530; the first use of possessive as a noun occurs in 1591, the first use of possessive case (which notes that it is like the Latin genitive, and may be called the genitive case in reference to English also) occurs in 1763, and the first use of possessive adjective dates from 1870.

The equivalent of Latin possessivus in Ancient Greek is κτητικός (ktētikós); linguistic terminology also refers to possessives as ktetics, particularly ktetic (possessive) adjectives and names derived from ktetics (ktetic personal names).[14]

Possessive and possessed case

[edit]

Nouns or pronouns with a possessive form are sometimes described as being in the possessive case. A more commonly used term in describing the grammar of various languages is genitive case, but that usually denotes a case with a broader range of functions than just producing possessive forms. (Some languages occasionally use the dative case to denote the possessor, as in the Serbo-Croatian kosa mu je gusta "his hair is thick" (literally "the hair to him is thick" in which "to him" is the dative pronoun mu).[15])

Other theorists reject the idea that the possessive in languages like English represents a grammatical case since possessive forms do not generally behave in a parallel fashion to what are normally identified as cases. In particular, in English, as noted above, the -'s can attach to noun phrases even when they do not end with their head noun, as in the king of Spain's, which is not typical behavior for a case ending. For further discussion of the issue, see English possessive § Status of the possessive as a grammatical case.

Some languages, such as the Cariban languages, can be said to have a possessed case, which indicates the thing possessed.[16] In many Afro-Asiatic languages, such as Arabic, nouns take a form with similar significance called the construct state, sometimes even if the possessor is marked in the genitive case. Classical Nahuatl similarly presents an inflected possessed form (or case) in nouns, which contrasts with a non-possessed form (the absolutive).

Semantics

[edit]

The relationship expressed by possessive determiners and similar forms is not necessarily one of possession in the strict sense of ownership. In English, strict possession has been found to be expressed in only about 40% of the situations labeled as "possessive" by linguists, a fact which may incline some to prefer the more traditional term "genitive".[1] The "possessor" may be, for example:

  • the person or thing to which the "possessed" stands in the designated relationship (my mother, his wife, your subordinates, our boss);
  • the person or thing of which the "possessed" is a part (my leg, the building's walls);
  • a person or thing affiliated with or identifying with the "possessed" (his country, our class, my people);
  • the performer, or sometimes the undergoer, of an action (his arrival, the government's overthrow)
  • the creator, supervisor, user, etc. of the "possessed" (Prince's album, the Irish jockey's horse).

For more examples, see Possession (linguistics) and English possessive § Semantics.

History

[edit]

Before the 18th century, the word possessive was not used, and was considered merely one of several uses of the genitive case.[17] This began to change in 1762 with Robert Lowth, whose use of possessive was copied by subsequent writers.[17] One result of this shift in terminology is the mistaken belief that the possessive form is only used for actual cases of possession or ownership (e.g., my book, the family's home) and not to indicate other, non-ownership forms of affiliation or association (e.g., their neighbor, the tree's environs).[17]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Sources

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Possessive

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In linguistics, a possessive refers to a grammatical form, case, or construction that encodes a relationship of possession, ownership, or close association between two entities, where one (the possessor) is asymmetrically related to the other (the possessed). This concept extends beyond literal ownership to include relational ties such as kinship, part-whole structures, or spatial associations, often distinguished as alienable (e.g., temporary or transferable possession) or inalienable (e.g., inherent or permanent relations like body parts). Possessives are a universal feature across languages but vary in marking, from inflectional suffixes and adpositions to dedicated pronouns and determiners. In English, possessives are primarily expressed through the genitive case, formed by adding an apostrophe and 's ('s) to singular nouns or an apostrophe alone to plural nouns ending in -s, as in "the dog's tail" or "the teachers' lounge," to denote ownership or attribution. They also include possessive determiners (e.g., my, your, his, her, its, our, their), which precede nouns to specify the possessor without indicating number or gender explicitly, and possessive pronouns (e.g., mine, yours, his, hers, its, ours, theirs), which stand alone as substitutes for noun phrases. These forms adhere to specific rules: for joint possession, the marker attaches to the final element in a coordination (e.g., "Anne and Gary's son"), while irregular plurals like "children" take the full 's (e.g., "children's toys"). Semantically, possessives involve quantification over possessed entities with an existential import, meaning the construction entails the existence of at least one relevant possession, and often "narrowing," where the possessor's scope is restricted to those entities that actually bear the relation. This allows flexibility in interpretation, as the exact relation (e.g., ownership vs. location) is pragmatically determined rather than strictly encoded, enabling uses like "John's fear of spiders" for an abstract association. Cross-linguistically, possessives may trigger agreement in gender, number, or case, as seen in languages like Somali with short possessive suffixes or Javanese with markers.

Fundamentals

Definition

In , the possessive is a grammatical or used to express relationships of , affiliation, or association between , such as a possessor and a possessed item. This form typically indicates that one entity (the possessor) has a connection to another (the possessed), encompassing not only literal possession but also broader relational ties like or part-whole structures. Across languages, possessives manifest in diverse ways, including as a dedicated case (often termed the ), an adjectival modifier, or a attached to the possessor. In English, for instance, the possessive is commonly marked by the on , as in "John's book," where "John" is the possessor and "book" is the possessed . This marking highlights the possessor's role in the relationship, a pattern prevalent in many languages where the possessor receives the overt grammatical indicator rather than the possessed entity. Possessives are fundamentally built on bases such as or , serving as a prerequisite for denoting these relational concepts without altering the core lexical items involved. This structural flexibility allows possessives to integrate into various syntactic environments while maintaining their relational function.

Types

Possessives in are broadly classified into three main morphological types: pronominal, adjectival, and forms, each serving to indicate or association while differing in their syntactic and phonological properties. Pronominal possessives function as determiners and typically precede the possessed , as seen in English examples like "my " or "your ," where they agree in and number with the possessor but not necessarily with the possessee. Adjectival possessives, in contrast, appear in attributive positions and often inflect for features like and number to match the possessed , such as in French "mon livre" (, masculine singular) or Italian "la mia casa" (, feminine singular). possessives are reduced, prosodically dependent forms that attach to the possessor , exemplified by the English genitive 's in "John's car," which lacks independent stress and cannot stand alone. Beyond morphological classification, possessives can be distinguished functionally as independent or dependent forms, reflecting their ability to substitute for or modify a . Dependent possessives require a following noun and act as determiners, such as English "my" in "my pen" or French "ton" in "ton ami" (your friend), emphasizing their role in specifying possession within a . Independent possessives, however, stand alone without a head noun, replacing the entire possessive construction, as in English "mine" for "the pen is mine" or French "le mien" for "le stylo est le mien" (the pen is mine). Some languages lack dedicated possessive types altogether, relying instead on postpositions to mark associative relations rather than inflected pronouns or clitics. For instance, Japanese employs the genitive particle "no" to indicate possession, as in "watashi no hon" (my book), where "no" functions as a postposition linking the possessor to the possessed without distinct pronominal forms.

Formation

Pronominal

Pronominal possessives are derived from s through morphological shifts that adapt the base forms to indicate ownership, often involving stem changes or suppletion to fit adjectival or pronominal roles. In English, the first-person singular I shifts to the possessive my (as a ) or mine (as an independent pronoun), while the second-person you becomes your or yours; these forms originated in as irregular inflections distinct from the genitive -s on nouns. Similarly, in Latin, the first-person singular ego derives the possessive meus, -a, -um ("my"), which declines according to the , number, and case of the possessed , as seen in paradigms like nominative masculine singular meus ("my book"). These derivations often exhibit irregularities, particularly in agreement features, where pronominal possessives must concord with the possessed in , number, and case, leading to paradigm variations. In German, the base form mein ("my") from the ich inflects irregularly: for masculine nominative singular it remains mein, but shifts to meine for feminine nominative singular (e.g., mein Auto "my car" vs. meine Tasche "my bag"), and further adjusts for cases like dative meinem or genitive meines, reflecting adjectival patterns. Examples of pronominal possessives in English and Spanish illustrate these fixed or declining forms, with English showing largely invariant independent pronouns and Spanish requiring and number agreement.
PersonEnglish DeterminerEnglish Independent Pronoun
1st singularmymine
2nd singularyouryours
3rd singular masc./neut.his/itshis/its
3rd singular fem.herhers
1st pluralourours
2nd pluralyouryours
3rd pluraltheirtheirs
PersonSpanish Masculine SingularSpanish Feminine SingularSpanish Masculine PluralSpanish Feminine Plural
1st singularmíomíamíosmías
2nd singulartuyotuyatuyostuyas
3rd singular/formalsuyosuyasuyossuyas
1st pluralnuestronuestranuestrosnuestras
2nd plural (Spain)vuestrovuestravuestrosvuestras
In agglutinative languages like Turkish, pronominal possessives take the form of suffixes attached directly to the possessed noun, marking the possessor's person and number without a separate pronoun word; for instance, ev-im ("my house") adds the first-person singular suffix -im to the noun stem ev- ("house").

Nominal

Nominal possessives are formed by modifying nouns to indicate ownership or association, primarily through methods such as suffixation, prepositional constructions, case marking, or juxtaposition. Suffixation involves attaching a dedicated morpheme to the possessor noun, as seen in English with the 's ending in phrases like "the king's crown," where the possessor "king" is inflected to show relation to the possessed noun "crown." This 's marker originated from the genitive case endings in Old English, such as -es, which marked possession in inflected forms like "cyninges" for "king's." Prepositional constructions link the possessor to the possessed using a preposition without altering the possessor noun's form, exemplified in French by the de construction, as in "le livre de Marie" (Mary's book). Case marking, common in inflectional languages, assigns a specific grammatical case to the possessor, such as the Russian genitive suffix -a in "dom otca" (father's house), indicating the possessor's role through ending change. Juxtaposition involves the direct adjacency of the possessor and possessed nouns without a linker, as in the Arabic idafa (construct state) construction kitāb al-ṭālib ("the student's book"). These formations vary based on the definiteness of the possessor, affecting article usage and specificity. For definite possessors, the construction often implies a unique or identified owner, as in English "the king's crown," where "the" specifies a particular king. Indefinite possessors, however, introduce generality or non-specificity, illustrated by "a dog's life," which refers to any dog's existence rather than a specific one. In French, definiteness influences article agreement, with "le chat du roi" (the king's cat) using the definite article for both possessor and possessed, while indefinite forms like "le chat d'un chien" (a dog's cat) adjust accordingly. In agglutinative languages like Hungarian, nominal possessives allow stacking to express multi-level possession, where possessive endings combine with further case markers. For instance, "házam" means "my ," and adding the genitive -é yields "házamé" (of my house), enabling complex relations through sequential affixation. This stacking reflects Hungarian's morphological productivity, contrasting with analytic approaches in languages like English or French.

Syntactic Properties

Sentence Integration

In linguistic syntax, possessive constructions integrate into sentences by occupying specific positions relative to the possessed , typically functioning within noun phrases (NPs) or determiner phrases (DPs). Languages vary in their preferred placement: pre-nominal possessives precede the head , as in English "John's car," where the possessor "John" attaches via the genitive marker 's to form a unified DP that determines the "car" Partee & Borschev, 2013. In contrast, post-nominal possessives follow the head , often introduced by a preposition, as in French "la voiture de John" (the car of John), where "de John" forms a prepositional phrase (PP) modifying the "voiture" Bernstein, 2005. Possessives can serve different phrase roles depending on the construction and language. In English, pronominal possessives like "my" function as determiners within the DP, specifying the head noun without additional marking, as in "my book," where "my" occupies the D position Partee & Borschev, 2013. Nominal possessives, such as "John's," head a possessive DP that embeds the possessor NP as a specifier, effectively acting as the phrase head in pre-nominal position Partee & Borschev, 2013. In some analyses, possessives may also pattern as adjectives when they inflect for agreement and modify without determinative force, though this is less common in analytic languages like English. These roles allow possessives to integrate seamlessly into larger sentence structures, such as subjects or objects. To illustrate integration, consider syntactic trees for simple sentences. In English, for "Mary read John's book," the possessive "John's book" forms a DP embedded in the VP's object position:

S ├── NP (subject): Mary └── VP ├── V: read └── NP (object, DP) ├── D': John's └── N': book

S ├── NP (subject): Mary └── VP ├── V: read └── NP (object, DP) ├── D': John's └── N': book

This tree shows the possessive DP as the complement to the verb, with "John's" in D' projecting the head N "book" Partee & Borschev, 2013. In German, pre-nominal genitive possessives integrate similarly but use case marking; for "Der Mann sah das Auto des Vaters" (The man saw the father's car), the structure embeds the genitive DP "des Vaters Auto" as the object:

S ├── NP (subject): Der Mann └── VP ├── V: sah └── NP (object, DP) ├── D: das ├── D' (genitive): des Vaters └── N': Auto

S ├── NP (subject): Der Mann └── VP ├── V: sah └── NP (object, DP) ├── D: das ├── D' (genitive): des Vaters └── N': Auto

Here, "des Vaters" functions as a genitive modifier within the DP, determining the noun "Auto" via case agreement. A notable syntactic effect occurs in languages like Welsh, where possessive pronouns trigger initial mutations on the possessed noun, altering its phonological form for integration. For instance, "fy nhŷ" () involves nasal mutation of initial /t/ to /nh/ after "fy," ensuring the possessive pronoun and noun cohere as a single NP BBC Welsh Grammar. This mutation rule applies specifically to singular possessives like "fy" (my) and "ei" (his/her/its), facilitating tight phrasal bonding without additional markers BBC Welsh Grammar.

Agreement Features

In many languages, possessive elements exhibit concord with the possessed noun in features such as gender, number, and sometimes case, ensuring morphological harmony within the noun phrase. This possessor-possessed concord is a key agreement mechanism, where the possessive morpheme or pronoun adjusts its form to match the possessed item's properties rather than those of the possessor. For instance, in Spanish, short-form possessive adjectives like mi ('my') inflect for gender and number to agree with the possessed noun: mi casa ('my house', feminine singular) versus mis casas ('my houses', feminine plural). Case interactions in possessive constructions often involve alignment between the possessor's case marking and the overall phrase's syntactic requirements. In Latin, the genitive case typically marks the possessor, remaining invariant even when the possessed noun shifts to another case, such as the ablative. For example, in ablative phrases denoting separation or origin, the structure maintains the genitive possessor alongside the ablative possessed noun, as in ab urbe Romae ('from the city of Rome'), where Romae is ablative and the implied possessor relation uses genitive forms in fuller expressions like a villa patris ('from the father's house'). This fixed genitive for possession ensures case alignment without concord in other features. In languages like , possessive constructions via the iḍāfa () structure demonstrate limited concord, with the possessed entering a construct state (losing marking) and the possessor following in the , but without obligatory or number agreement between the two nouns. Paradigms in Standard Arabic show options for pronominal possessors, where suffixes attach directly to the possessed and agree in , , and number with the possessor rather than the possessed: for a masculine singular possessed like kitāb ('book'), suffixes yield kitāb-ī ('my book', agreeing with 1st singular possessor) or kitāb-uhu ('his book', masculine singular possessor), but full possessors like kitābu l-maliki ('the king's book') exhibit no such feature concord, highlighting potential "failures" in matching when non-pronominal. This contrasts with stricter concord systems and allows interpretive flexibility in dialectal variations, such as in where analytic options may introduce additional agreement markers. A distinctive pattern appears in , where possessive agreement relies on prefixes rather than Indo-European-style gender or number alone. In , the possessed noun's class prefix determines the form of the , which follows and agrees in class: for class 7 (ki-), ki-tabu changu ('my book') uses cha- (possessive stem for classes 7/8) combined with -ngu (1st person singular), ensuring class concord across the phrase. This system extends to all Bantu , prioritizing semantic categorization in agreement.

Terminology

Core Concepts

In possessive constructions, the core relationship involves two primary entities: the possessor, which denotes the entity that owns, controls, or is associated with another, and the possessed, also known as the possessum, which represents the entity owned, controlled, or associated. This binary structure forms the foundation of possessive grammar across languages, where the possessor typically precedes or modifies the possessed to express relations such as ownership or part-whole inclusion. A key distinction within these relations is alienable possession, which refers to a separable bond between possessor and possessed, often involving transferable items like objects or that can change ownership without inherent ties. In contrast to (though not elaborated here), alienable cases allow for temporary or conditional associations, as seen in English examples like "John's car," where the vehicle can be sold or exchanged. Related to these concepts is the construct state in , a morphological form where the possessed undergoes alteration to indicate a tight possessive or attributive link with the following possessor, without an intervening marker. For instance, in Hebrew, "bayit ha-melekh" ("house of the king") shifts to the construct form "beyt ha-melekh," emphasizing the possessed noun's dependency on the possessor. This structure highlights non-pronominal possession in languages like and Hebrew, where propagates from possessor to possessed. In English, a notable related construction is the double genitive, which combines a prepositional phrase with a possessive marker, as in "a friend of John's," allowing indefinite reference to the possessed while specifying the possessor. This form, also termed the possessive partitive, facilitates nuanced expressions of partial or associative possession, distinct from simple Saxon genitives like "John's friend." Linguists often debate the terminology possessive versus genitive, particularly in English, where "possessive" typically applies to pronominal forms (e.g., "his book") and adjectival uses, while "genitive" denotes the nominal case marker 's (e.g., "John's book") or broader relational functions. This distinction arises from historical case systems, with "possessive" emphasizing semantic ownership and "genitive" reflecting syntactic case assignment, though overlap persists in descriptive practice. Possessives frequently involve the oblique case, a non-nominative form used for possessors in languages with rich case systems, marking them as indirect or dependent elements rather than subjects. For example, in Latin, the genitive "poetae" in "liber poetae" ("book of the poet") exemplifies an oblique possessive, subordinating the possessor to the possessed noun's head role. The possessive construction is frequently realized through the in many languages, where it serves as a subtype or specifically denoting or direct association, but the genitive extends to broader relational functions such as part-whole compositions and descriptions. For instance, in , the genitive marks possession in phrases like τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ βιβλίον ("the brother's book"), yet it also conveys part-whole relations, as in κυκλίας τροχούς ("wheels of a circle," implying circular parts), and qualitative descriptions like ἀνὴρ ἀγαθός ("a good man," literally "man of goodness"), highlighting a divergence where possessive use is narrower than the genitive's overall scope. In contrast to the possessive, the typically encodes indirect or relations rather than direct , often appearing in contexts of transfer or advantage that imply temporary or ethical possession. For example, in Latin, the dative in puero donum do ("I give a to the ") indicates the recipient as , akin to indirect possession, whereas a possessive genitive like pueri donum ("the boy's ") denotes outright . Similarly, in German, the possessive dative in Ich backe dir einen ("I bake you a cake") suggests the cake is intended for the , differing from direct possession via genitive or possessive pronouns. The , meanwhile, focuses on separation or source, as in Latin domo patris ("from the father's house"), where it expresses origin from a possessed entity rather than the possession itself. A notable cross-linguistic variation occurs in Finnish, where definite possession employs the , as in talon katto ("the of the house"), but indefinite or partial possession may utilize the to indicate unspecified quantities or ongoing relations, such as talon kattia in contexts implying "some of the house's " or incomplete , distinguishing it from the genitive's in fixed attributions. From a theoretical perspective, functionalist approaches in often conceptualize the possessive not as a rigid morphological case but as a semantic that encodes relational meanings like or association, allowing flexibility across independent of strict case marking. This view emphasizes usage-based patterns where possessives align with thematic roles such as or possessor, rather than formal case paradigms.

Semantics

Possession Types

In linguistics, possession is semantically categorized into alienable and inalienable types, reflecting the perceived permanence or intrinsic nature of the relationship between the possessor and the possessed entity. typically involves inherent or unbreakable bonds, such as body parts or relations, exemplified by English phrases like "my " or "her ," where the connection is biologically or socially fixed and cannot be transferred. Alienable possession, by contrast, denotes temporary or acquired relationships that can be severed, such as of objects, as in "my car" or "their house," where the possessor has control but no intrinsic tie to the possessed. This binary distinction structures how languages encode possession, influencing morphological and syntactic choices across diverse typological profiles. Beyond concrete ownership, possession extends to abstract domains, encompassing relational and part-whole relations that do not involve physical transfer. Relational possession captures non-physical associations, such as intellectual or experiential links, illustrated by "John's opinion on the matter," where the opinion is attributed to John without implying ownership in a material sense. Part-whole possession, often treated as a subtype of inalienable, denotes components of a larger entity, as in "the car's engine," highlighting a structural dependency rather than voluntary control. These abstract categories broaden the semantic scope of possession, allowing languages to express complex interconnections beyond tangible goods. Cross-linguistically, these possession types manifest in varied marking strategies that underscore semantic contrasts. In like Russian, Polish, Croatian/Serbian, and Slovenian, is frequently expressed through the , which conveys intimate or inherent relations, as in Russian "u menja bol' v ruke" ('I have in my '), where the dative "menja" signals the body's intrinsic connection without genitive marking typical of alienable items. This dative usage highlights a tighter bond for inalienables compared to alienables, which may employ genitive or prepositional constructions. Similarly, in , an Austronesian language, possession types are morphologically distinguished via a-class and o-class markers: o-class for inalienable relations like body parts (e.g., "tōku ringa" 'my ') and a-class for alienable ones like possessions (e.g., "tāku motokā" 'my '), functioning as classifiers that categorize the semantic nature of the link. Such systems illustrate how languages morphologically encode possession semantics to differentiate core relational nuances.

Interpretive Variations

Possessive constructions in English often exhibit ambiguities arising from multiple possible relations between the possessor and possessum, influenced by contextual cues. For instance, "Shakespeare's plays" can denote authorship, where Shakespeare is the creator, or literal ownership if interpreted as personal property, highlighting the interpretive flexibility of genitive forms. Similarly, "Paris's streets" typically evokes a locative or part-whole relation, associating the streets with the city's spatial extent, but could ambiguously suggest control or affiliation in specific narratives. These ambiguities stem from the semantic underspecification of possessives, allowing relations like agentive creation or spatial inclusion to compete without explicit disambiguation. Pragmatic factors further shape possessive interpretations through implicatures that infer relations beyond literal semantics. In phrases like "John's team," the possessive may implicate membership or affiliation rather than strict , relying on conversational to convey John's as a player or leader. Such implicatures arise from Gricean maxims of and quantity, where speakers assume the most contextually salient relation, such as social bonds in collaborative settings. Corpus analyses reveal that these pragmatic enrichments are multidimensional, drawing on shared to resolve potential , with explicit contextual support often required for non-prototypical readings like aspirational possession (e.g., "the house Mary's dreaming of buying"). Metaphorical extensions of possessives also contribute to interpretive variation. In sign languages such as (ASL), possessive directionality—achieved through pointing toward the possessor—conveys relational nuances, while nonmanual markers like intensified facial expressions or head tilts add emphasis to the bond's strength or emotional intensity. For example, a firmer point with furrowed brows might intensify a familial possessive relation compared to a neutral one for casual ownership. These visual-pragmatic elements underscore how modality-specific features enhance interpretive depth in possessives.

Historical and Typological Overview

Etymology and Evolution

The in (PIE), the reconstructed ancestor of the , utilized the thematic suffix -osyo (or -osjo) to mark possession and relational modification in singular forms, particularly for o-stem nouns. This ending, derived from an adjectival paradigm combining the nominative -os with a relative -yo, became predominant in post-Anatolian PIE and is reflected in descendant languages such as -asya, -oio, and early Latin forms like -osio. Over millennia, this suffix influenced the development of possessive markers across Indo-European branches, adapting through phonological changes and grammatical simplification in various lineages. In the specific case of English, the modern possessive 's traces its origins to the (c. 450–1150 CE) genitive singular -es, primarily used for strong masculine and neuter s to indicate possession. During the period (c. 1100–1500 CE), amid the broader loss of inflectional endings due to contact with Norse and internal simplification, this cliticized, detaching from individual nouns and attaching to entire noun phrases as a postposed marker, as seen in transitions from forms like stānes ( "of the stone") to stones ( possessive). This shift marked the genitive's transformation from a case ending to a versatile , solidifying by . Semitic languages, a distinct family unrelated to Indo-European, developed possessive constructions through the construct state, a morphologically bound form where the possessed noun undergoes alteration when followed by its possessor, evolving from earlier appositional juxtapositions of nouns without overt marking. This innovation is reconstructible to Proto-Semitic (c. 3750–3000 BCE), with the earliest written attestations appearing in Akkadian texts from the mid-third millennium BCE, around 2500 BCE, where the construct state already expresses inalienable and alienable possession, as in šar bēlim ("king of the lord"). Unlike Indo-European genitives, the Semitic construct state emphasizes syntactic bonding over case suffixes, influencing all branches including Northwest Semitic (e.g., Hebrew) and Ethio-Semitic. Diachronic shifts in possessive marking are evident in the transition from synthetic to analytic structures in languages like English, where the erosion of case system—driven by phonological reduction and —replaced overt genitive inflections with prepositional constructions (e.g., "of the king") alongside the surviving 's for direct possession. This pattern recurs in other analytic , such as French and Spanish, where possessive relations shifted to prepositions like de/del, reflecting a broader typological trend toward and function words over morphology to convey grammatical roles.

Cross-Linguistic Patterns

Possessive constructions exhibit significant typological diversity across languages, reflecting varied morphological, syntactic, and pragmatic strategies for encoding relationships between possessors and possessed entities. Common strategies include case-marking, where the possessor is inflected to indicate its grammatical role; adpositional marking, using prepositions or particles to link the possessor and possessed; and zero-marking, where no overt marker is used, relying instead on or context. These approaches highlight how languages balance explicit grammatical signaling with contextual inference in expressing possession. In Indo-European languages, case-marking via the genitive is prevalent for possession, as seen in Latin, where the genitive case denotes the possessor following the possessed noun, such as in "libri patris" meaning "the father's book." Slavic languages similarly employ the genitive for nominal possession, with constructions like Croatian "sinovi otaca" ("sons of the fathers"), where the possessor appears in the genitive case without additional markers, a pattern inherited from Proto-Slavic and retained across modern Slavic varieties. In contrast, Germanic languages often utilize possessive pronouns as determiners preceding the possessed noun, agreeing in gender, number, and case, as in Low Saxon "ehr Huus" ("her house") or Dutch "mijn huis" ("my house"), which replace fuller genitive constructions and allow for pro-drop of the possessor in some dialects. Beyond Indo-European, non-Indo-European families display further variation. frequently employ possessive suffixes attached directly to the possessed noun to index the person and number of the possessor, as in Hungarian "ház-am" ("my house"), where "-am" marks first-person singular possession, integrating the relation morphologically within the . In Niger-Congo languages, serial verb constructions can express possession, particularly alienable types, by chaining verbs like "have" or "hold" with the possessed item, as in Akan examples where "me ho adwuma" ("I have work") uses the verb "ho" ("have") in a serialized structure to convey ownership without dedicated possessive morphology. like rely on the particle "de" as an adposition to connect possessor and possessed, as in "wǒ de shū" ("my book"), where "de" functions as a versatile linker accommodating both alienable and inalienable relations. Certain Austronesian languages, particularly in the Oceanic subgroup, feature zero-marking for specific possession types, especially inalienable relations, where the possessor pronoun suffixes directly to the possessed noun without an intervening marker, as in Proto-Oceanic reconstructions yielding forms like "na tamwan-Ø-gu" (with zero for the linker in some daughter languages, meaning "my father"). A striking example of minimal marking occurs in Pirahã, an Amazonian isolate, where possessives lack any dedicated morphological indicators and depend entirely on word order, with the possessor typically preceding the possessed in juxtapositions like "ti kagáí" ("my dog"), a pattern documented in linguistic studies from the early 2000s that underscores the language's reliance on pragmatic context over grammatical encoding.

References

  1. https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstreams/351ae331-1190-4f4a-8b83-8b1e9d877a63/download
  2. https://www.neliti.com/publications/410511/possessive-expressions-in-javanese
  3. https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/grammar/a1-a2-grammar/possessive-s
  4. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/possessive
  5. https://su.se/polopoly_fs/1.165893.1391710103!/menu/standard/file/2013%20PWSemPossPrepubl.pdf
  6. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/handle/2077/82193/AF1320%2520B.A.%2520Abdibashir.%2520A%2520study%2520of%2520short%2520possessive%2520suffixes%2520final.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  7. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~beatrice/syntax-textbook/ch8.html
  8. https://academic.oup.com/book/8102/chapter/153537586
  9. https://classics.osu.edu/Undergraduate-Studies/Latin-Program/Grammar/Cases/English-Case
  10. https://people.umass.edu/~sharris/in/gram/GrammarBook/GramCases.html
  11. https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/5703/
  12. https://www.unige.ch/lettres/linge/syntaxe/journal/pdf_volume_one/article2_ihsane.pdf
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346753744_Independent_and_dependent_possessive_person_forms_Three_universals
  14. https://linguistics.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/A-Further-Step-towards-a-Minimalist-Analysis-of-Japanese-no-1.pdf
  15. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2002/ling001/morphology.html
  16. https://scholarworks.utep.edu/context/books/article/1001/viewcontent/latin_grammar_sm.pdf
  17. https://resources.german.lsa.umich.edu/grammatik/basic-chart/
  18. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3148&context=honors_theses
  19. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/deniz/files/deniztupresentation.pdf
  20. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-247
  21. https://academic.oup.com/book/12324/chapter/161872999
  22. https://opentext.uoregon.edu/introarabic/chapter/the-nisba-adjective-ii/
  23. https://depts.washington.edu/hpsg2011/pp/Thuilier.pdf
  24. https://www.rae.es/dpd/adjetivos%20posesivos
  25. https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/genitive
  26. https://theses.ncl.ac.uk/jspui/bitstream/10443/4763/1/Alrasheedi%2520E%25202019.pdf
  27. https://mark.vandevelde.cnrs.fr/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Van-de-Velde_Bantu_possession_OGBL.pdf
  28. https://www.academia.edu/38786215/Towards_a_typology_of_prominent_internal_possessors
  29. https://tls.ling.utexas.edu/2012/proceedings/TLS13-03-Loos.pdf
  30. https://www.academia.edu/6780469/Alienable_Inalienable_Possession_From_Syntax_to_Semantics
  31. https://ling.yale.edu/media/257/download?inline
  32. http://udel.edu/~bruening/Downloads/ConstructState3.pdf
  33. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4047919
  34. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4176425
  35. http://people.umass.edu/partee/NZ_2006/NZ5GenitivesI.pdf
  36. https://files.commons.gc.cuny.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir/2721/files/2019/04/bernsteintortora2005.pdf
  37. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Spring_2001/ling150/ch5.html
  38. https://www1.wellesley.edu/sites/default/files/assets/departments/eall/tham/bls39-handout-working.pdf
  39. https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/goodell/genitive
  40. https://www.ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/classify-genitive.htm
  41. https://classics.osu.edu/Undergraduate-Studies/Latin-Program/Grammar/Cases/dative-case
  42. https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/dative-indirect-object-transitive-verbs
  43. https://dcc.dickinson.edu/grammar/latin/ablative
  44. https://people.umass.edu/partee/MGU_Web_13/materials/MGU1310.pdf
  45. https://philarchive.org/archive/LICOTI
  46. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660223.003.0001
  47. https://slaviccenters.duke.edu/sites/slaviccenters.duke.edu/files/media_items_files/3saric.original.pdf
  48. https://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~kbaclawski/Baclawski_2011_Maori_possession.pdf
  49. http://people.umass.edu/partee/NZ_2006/NZ8GenitivesII.pdf
  50. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~hovy/papers/13ACL-possessives.pdf
  51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336881515_The_pragmatics_of_possession_A_corpus_study_of_English_prenominial_possessives
  52. https://linguistics.ucla.edu/general/dissertations/StortoLucaDissertationUCLA2003.pdf
  53. https://www.bu.edu/asllrp/asllrpr12.pdf
  54. https://www.lifeprint.com/asl101/pages-layout/possession.htm
  55. https://www.academia.edu/7197523/The_PIE_thematic_genitive
  56. https://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/ExtendedAbs/article/download/765/564/735
  57. https://academic.oup.com/book/12324/chapter/161875936
  58. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-linguistic-typology/semitic-language-family/D2E3FBF4B193196D6DE1DABE72099207
  59. https://linguistics.stonybrook.edu/faculty/robert.hoberman/files/publications/Gragg_Hoberman_2012_Semitic.pdf
  60. https://reunido.uniovi.es/index.php/SELIM/article/view/22218
  61. https://src-h.slav.hokudai.ac.jp/coe21/publish/no24_ses/11_Matasovic.pdf
  62. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228721752_Pro-drop_in_nominal_possessive_constructions
  63. https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/ubiquity-partner-network/map/Gwen_Eva_Janda.pdf
  64. https://cstn.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/aikhenvald_dixon-serial_verb_constructions_explorations_in_linguistic_typology.pdf
  65. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286674817_Possessive_constructions_in_Mandarin_Chinese
  66. http://www.biolinguagem.com/ling_cog_cult/everett_2005_grammar_cognition_piraha.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.