Cover not available

In:Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 14: Papers from the 2013 Piliscsaba Conference
Edited by Katalin É. Kiss, Balázs Surányi and Éva Dékány
[Approaches to Hungarian 14] 2015
► pp. 121–145

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

The morphosyntax of (in)alienably possessed noun phrases

The Hungarian contribution

 | Linguistics Program, CUNY Graduate Center
Published online: 3 June 2015
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.14.05dik
This paper argues that there is a fundamental difference between alienable and inalienable possession in the syntax of the noun phrase, and that this difference involves direction of predication. A possessum is the subject of a predicate that is or contains the possessor; the configurational relationship between the possessive predicate and its subject is established by a relator that takes the possessum either as its specifier or as its complement, with the possessive predicate occupying the other position in the small clause. Alienably possessed noun phrases involve an underlying syntax in which the possessum is the relator’s specifier; inalienable possession constructions are built on a structure in which the possessum is the complement of the relator. The paper provides an analytical sketch of a partial typology of possessed noun phrases and an account of the cross-linguistic generalisation that for languages that show a systematic structural distinction between alienable and inalienable adnominal possession, it is the inalienably possessed noun phrase that is morphosyntactically simpler than the alienably possessed one. The focus of the discussion is on Hungarian, a language whose ‘possessedness marker’ -(j)a/-(j)e is teased apart into two component parts: an affixal ‘spurious’ article -a/e lexicalising the relator of DP-internal possession, and an additional -j- that in noun phrases that show a morphological alienability split has morphemic status, functioning as the linker that facilitates the Predicate Inversion derivation of alienably possessed noun phrases.
References (28)
References
Bennis, Hans, Norbert Corver & Marcel den Dikken (1998). Predication in nominal phrases. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 1. 85–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bolinger, Dwight. 1967. Adjectives in English: Attribution and predication. Lingua 18. 1–34. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diesing, Molly. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den. 1999. On the structural representation of possession and agreement. The case of (anti-)agreement in Hungarian possessed nominal phrases. In István Kenesei (ed.), Crossing boundaries: Theoretical advances in Central and Eastern European languages, 137–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Relators and linkers: The syntax of predication, predicate inversion, and copulas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2011. On the strategies for forming long A′–dependencies: Evidence from Hungarian. In Balázs Surányi (ed.), [title tbd] (volume of papers from the conference on Minimalist Approaches to Syntactic Locality). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (to appear).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den & Anikó Lipták. 1997. Csoda egy nyelv . In Jane Coerts & Helen de Hoop (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1997. 61–72. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dikken, Marcel den, Anikó Lipták & Zsófia Zvolenszky. 2001. On inclusive reference anaphora: New perspectives from Hungarian. In Karine Megerdoomian & Leora Anne Bar-El (eds.), WCCFL 20 Proceedings, 137–49. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dobler, Eva. 2008. The morpho-phonology of (in)alienable possession. In Susie Jones (ed.), Proceedings of the 2008 annual conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association/Actes du congrès annuel de l’Association canadienne de linguistique 2008.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elekfi, László. 2000. Semantic differences of suffix alternates in Huangarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 47. 145–177. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gerland, Doris & Albert Ortmann. 2012. What counts as relational in Hungarian, Uralic and beyond? CTF 2012, Düsseldorf.
Guéron, Jacqueline. 1985. Inalienable possession, PRO-inclusion and lexical chains. In Jacqueline Guéron, Hans-Georg Obenauer & Jean-Yves Pollock (eds.), Grammatical representation. Dordrecht: Foris. 43–86.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. Syntactic universals and usage frequency, 3: Alienable vs. inalienable possessive constructions. Handout, Leipzig Spring School on Linguistic Diversity.
Heine, Bernd & Kézié Lébikaza. 1997. On attributive possession in Kabiye. In Joan Bybee, John Haiman & Sandra Thompson (eds.), Essays on language function and language type, 217–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kenesei, István. 1995. On bracketing paradoxes. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 43. 153–173.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiefer, Ferenc. 1985. Natural morphology. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 35. 85–105.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kratzer, Angelika. 1995. Stage-level/individual-level predicates. In Gregory Carlson & Francis Pelletier (eds.), The generic book, 125–175. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larson, Richard & Franc Marušić. 2004. Indefinite pronoun structures with APs. Linguistic Inquiry 35. 268–287. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lichtenberk, Frantisek. 1985. Possessive constructions in Oceanic languages and Proto-Oceanic. In Andrew Pawley & Lois Carrington (eds.), Austronesian linguistics at the 15th Pacific Science Congress. Pacific Linguistics C-88. 93–140.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moravcsik, Edith. 2003. Inflectional morphology in the Hungarian noun phrase: A typological assessment. In Frans Plank (ed.), Noun phrase structure in the languages of Europe. Berlin: de Gruyter. 113–252.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Napoli, Donna Jo. 1989. Predication theory: A case study for indexing theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nichols, Johanna. 1988. On alienable and inalienable possession. In W. Shipley (ed.), In honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American Linguistics, 557–609. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rácz, Péter. 2010. Hungarian phonology and morphology: Discord in the possessive allomorphy of Hungarian. MA thesis, ELTE.
Rácz, Péter & Péter Rebrus. 2012. Complexity and distinctiveness in Hungarian possessive allomorphy. In Ferenc Kiefer, Mária Ladányi & Péter Siptár (eds.), Current issues in morphological theory: (Ir)regularity, analogy and frequency, 51–64. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schirm, Anita. 2009. Alienable and inalienable possession in Hungarian. Paper presented at New Trends in Uralistics , Szeged, 3–5 September 2009. Earlier version published as ‘Az elidegeníthető és az elidegeníthetetlen birtoklás kifejezésmódjairól’, in Nyelvtudomány I (2005). 155–169.
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1983. The possessor that ran away from home. The Linguistic Review 3. 89–102. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1994. The noun phrase. In Ferenc Kiefer & Katalin É. Kiss (eds.), The syntactic structure of Hungarian. Syntax and Semantics 27, 179–274. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szabolcsi, Anna & Tibor Laczkó. 1992. A főnévi csoport szerkezete. In Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan I. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 179–298.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (8)

Cited by eight other publications

Monich, Irina
2023. Morphological analysis of alienability contrast in Nuer: an atypical typical case. The Linguistic Review 40:2 ► pp. 217 ff. DOI logo
Dékány, Éva
2021. Possessive DPs. In The Hungarian Nominal Functional Sequence [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 100], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Dékány, Éva
2021. The Functional Sequence Above QP. In The Hungarian Nominal Functional Sequence [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 100], ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
den Dikken, Marcel
2018. An Integrated Perspective on Hungarian Nominal and Verbal Inflection. In Boundaries Crossed, at the Interfaces of Morphosyntax, Phonology, Pragmatics and Semantics [Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 94], ► pp. 147 ff. DOI logo
den Dikken, Marcel
2023. Associative plurals and their associates. Journal of Uralic Linguistics 2:1 ► pp. 50 ff. DOI logo
Farkas, Judit & Gábor Alberti
2017. Általánosítások a potenciális magyar birtokszóváltozatokra vonatkozóan. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 4:1 ► pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
Hegedűs, Veronika & Éva Dékány
2017. Two positions for verbal modifiers. In Approaches to Hungarian [Approaches to Hungarian, 15], ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Alberti, Gábor & Judit Farkas
2015. Az elidegeníthető birtoklást kifejező -j- képző esete a -(Vt)t főnévképzővel és más főnévképzőkkel. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 2:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue