Amerindian Possessives

At 11:03 AM -0500 2/7/03, Karapcik, Mike wrote:
>        Hi,
>        I have a question for the Gatherers of Extremely Enlightening
>Knowledge (or GEEKs, for short ;-) ).
>        On the subject of possessives, for continental North American
>languages, how common is the distinction between alienable and inalienable
>possession? I know Hawai'ian and the other Polynesian languages have
>different possessive markers for alienable and inalienable possessions, and
>this is the structure I'm referring to. (I'm not asking about inherently
>possessed items, such as in many Southwest languages.)
Marianne Mithun, in her book _The Languages of Native North America_ does not
distinguish between what you are calling inalienable possession and inherent
possession. I'm not sure that I see the distinction either. Well, I can see it,
but it doesn't seem to be a real one. Even the languages which have inherent
possession (Navajo and Luiseño come to mind) also have a way to mention
inherently possessed referents without a possessor. In Navajo the prefix a- is
used; it's almost like saying "someone's X" without specifying the someone.

[snip nice description of Tekwari possession]

>        So, anyway, I was wondering. Do any Amerind languages have
>alienable/inalienable possession that works anything like this? Or have I
>made something that is more Polynesian than Amerind?
Maybe; perhaps the correct distinction is Pacific Rim vs elsewhere. Look at the
coastal languages of the Americas and see what they do. It wouldn't surprise me
a bit to see a Polynesian style alienable-inalienable distinction. Heck, even
English has a covert (in the Whorfian sense) alienable/inalienable distinction.
Try this out:

1.  He hit my arm.
2.  He hit me on the arm.

What does 1. mean? What does 2. mean? Do they mean the same thing?

Now try:

3.  He hit my BMW.
4.  He hit me on the BMW.

What does 3. mean? What does 4. mean? Do they mean the same thing?

Cool, eh?

Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga                                               Dirk_Elzinga@byu.edu

"It is important not to let one's aesthetics interfere with the appreciation of
fact." - Stephen Anderson