�e construct case hisparadox

Hello,

> Meþinks a paradox ariseþ in ðe construct case hisuse, for
> hwereas posession
> is marked on ðe þing possessed, ðe gramatical role must
> ðerefore be marked
> upon ðe possessor, even ðough ðis role aplieþ strictly to ðe
> posessed and not to ðe posessor.
I'm not sure I'm following you. Construct case is an instance of head-
marking, yet I do not think that completely head-marking languages
exist. The distinction between construct-case and genitive-case
constructions does not have anything to do with assigning, for
instance, thematic roles to the NP. Whether the thematic role of a
given argument is marked on the NP itself (by case, for instance, and
there may be different techniques for expressing it - it might be only
the head, or all words in the NP, or whatever) or on the verb (as in
Swahili) is totally orthogonal to the question of head-marking vs.
dependent marking in possessive constructions.

Pavel
--
Pavel Iosad               pavel_iosad@mail.ru

Nid byd, byd heb wybodaeth
                 --Welsh saying

Reply