{"title":"Ͻkere is doing something different in adnominal possession","authors":"Okrah Oppong","doi":"10.3765/plsa.v8i1.5464","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cross-linguistically, some languages make a morphosyntactic distinction between alienable and inalienable adnominal possession, where alienable possession is more morphologically marked, and inalienable possession shows a tighter structural bond between the possessor and possessee. In this paper, I show that Ɔkere violates these cross-linguistic generalizations differently. I also show that two types of mó occur in the language, one is a possessive marker, and the other is an independent pronoun. Again, I show that the nature of the possessive marker and the independent pronoun leads to a pro-drop in inalienable possession. The data and analysis in this paper favor proposing an overt possessive marker and a covert possessive marker. This paper adds to the literature on the exceptions to the cross-linguistic generalizations on adnominal possession by showing that the exceptions to the cross-linguistic generalizations may manifest differently in some languages. ","PeriodicalId":299752,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America","volume":"69 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v8i1.5464","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cross-linguistically, some languages make a morphosyntactic distinction between alienable and inalienable adnominal possession, where alienable possession is more morphologically marked, and inalienable possession shows a tighter structural bond between the possessor and possessee. In this paper, I show that Ɔkere violates these cross-linguistic generalizations differently. I also show that two types of mó occur in the language, one is a possessive marker, and the other is an independent pronoun. Again, I show that the nature of the possessive marker and the independent pronoun leads to a pro-drop in inalienable possession. The data and analysis in this paper favor proposing an overt possessive marker and a covert possessive marker. This paper adds to the literature on the exceptions to the cross-linguistic generalizations on adnominal possession by showing that the exceptions to the cross-linguistic generalizations may manifest differently in some languages.