Re: Possessible and non-possessible nouns

Lars Henrik Mathiesen skrev:

>   Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1999 18:47:20 -0200
>   From: Gustavo Eulalio <guga@...>
>
>           As I told before, I'm learning Tupi.
>           I found out an interesting feature in it. It has
>   possessible and non-possessible nouns. Explaining:
>           Possessible nouns are the things or people "which make
>   part of a whole, or are members of a relation system."
>           Non-possessible nouns are mostly the elements of nature,
>   or better, what is not seen as making part of a whole or who
>   isn't member of a relation system.
>
>The distinction is not unusual in natlangs. But I have more often
>seen it called inalienable possesion (my hand --- it will always be
>mine) and alienable possesion (my bike --- I can sell it). Also the
>case where single important objects of alienable types can be used
>with inalienable possesion.
The way I understand it, in/alienable possession is not quite the
same as possessability. In a language that distinguishes
possessability, there are certain classes of nouns that simply
_cannot_ be possessed. In Polynesian languages that have
in/alienable possession, all nouns can be possessed. There are just
two kinds of possession.

I have to agree with Lars Henrik though. The way Gustavo has defined
and exemplified the two different types of nouns in Tupi resembles a
lot more like the distinction between alienable vs. inalienable
rather than possessable vs. non-possessable (as I understand it).

Gustavo, which is it?

Regards,
-Kristian- 8-)