Re: THEORY: genitive vs. construct case/izafe

Hallo!

tomhchappell wrote:

> Hello, Joerg, Henrik, Julia, and others.
> --- In conlang@yahoogroups.com, Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@W...>
> wrote:
> > Hallo!
> >
> > Henrik Theiling wrote:
> >
> > > [snip]
> > > Assume the whole phrase is in case X, then you get:
> > >
> > >     Modifier-GEN Modified-X  ==  Modifier-X Modified-CONSTR
> > >
> > > [snip]
> >
> > Exactly.  But more precisely, it is the construct _state_, because
> > the modified noun can be, in languages with case systems such as
> > Classical Arabic, of any case.
>
> It seems to me that "This is a Job for Case-Stacking!"
> Are "genitive phrases" the most typical place to find case-stacking
> in languages that allow case-stacking?
Yes, they are!  My conlang Old Albic, for example, does it:

(1) mbaras    attoras        mamoras
    house-LOC father-GEN-LOC 1SG:LOC-MASC-GEN-LOC
    `at my father's house'

This phrase also has _mbaras_ in construct state; it is definite
without an article.

> > So, it is "Modifier Modified-CONSTR-X"
> > with "X" being the case of the NP.  Classical Arabic also has a
> > genitive case, so it is "Modified-CONSTR-X Modifier-GEN" (Arabic
> > puts modifiers after the head).
>
> ?So in Arabic, "genitive phrases"
> (those in which a noun modifies a noun e.g.) are "doubly marked",
> both "head-marked" and "dependent-marked"?
>
> Also, if the "CONSTR" qualifies as (can be properly called) a "case",
> is the "Modified-CONSTR-X" an example of case-stacking?
Depends on what you understand to be a case; normally, the construct
state is not considered a case.

> > [snip]
>
> Thanks for any answers.
Greetings,

Jörg.

Reply