Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Mandatory possession

From:R. Nierse <rnierse@...>
Date:Thursday, October 7, 1999, 9:42
> Van: Christophe Grandsire <grandsir@...> > Aan: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...> > Onderwerp: Mandatory possession > Datum: donderdag 7 oktober 1999 9:27 > > Hi all, > > I want to add in Chasma"o"cho the feature of mandatory
possession, and
> I need some information about it. > > I know that in languages having this feature, words needing
mandatory
> possessives refer generally to the family. Are there other kinds of > words that need this (I'm thinking of parts of body maybe, but are there > others?). > > Also, in the case of mandatory possession, how regular are the
words
> that use it?
I known Lokono Arawak has that feature. Some forms are irregular like the word for 'house': da-Sikwa my house bahi- house (in general) [i-= barred i]
> That's to say, do those words behave just like any other > word, just having always a possessive marking that is the same that for > the ones that don't need it, or do those words have different roots > depending on the possessor, or is the root and the possessive so blended > that you can't recognize really a common root for all forms of the same > word? >
In Lokono there is no morphological difference between alienable and inalienable forms.
> And finally, how languages that have mandatory possession manage
to use
> the words having this feature when possession is completely irrelevant > (for instance, when speaking of "a mother" in general)? Do they use a > different word than the one with mandatory possessives? And when the > possessor appears (like in "Peter's mother"), do they use a different > word or just use a construction like: "Peter's his mother"?
Some words are completely different (see the example of 'house'), but there is a regular way to form inalienable words without the mandatory possessives. -ho is added: da-khabo my hand khabo-ho hand I think it is -ho, but could be -hV too.