Generalizations on potential possessee variants in Hungarian

Article Sidebar

Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 4/1 (2017)
PDF (Magyar)
Published: Jun 2, 2017
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14232/JENY.2017.1.5
Keywords:
possessedness suffix, alienable and inalienable possession, deverbal nominals, hatnék-nouns

Main Article Content

Judit Farkas
University of Pécs, Department of Linguistics
Gábor Alberti
University of Pécs, Department of Linguistics
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8907-0715

Abstract

This paper discusses the relation between the formal variations of the Hungarian possessedness suffix -(j)A and (in)alienable possession. The cornerstone of our approach is that, first of all, three potential formal variations of possessed nouns are defined on the basis of phonotactic and historical factors. It is upon them that we can base a uniform system of rules without exceptions concerning all Hungarian nouns that formulate which variations can be associated with kinds of meaning expressing alienable possession and which variations with kinds of meaning expressing inalienable possession. Altogether, seven domains of Hungarian nouns can be differentiated in this approach; in which all nouns derived by means of productive nominalizers have been placed. Distinguished attention has been devoted to the special group of hatnék-nouns, which shows such dialectical differences on the basis of which it seems to be necessary to rethink the dichotomy between alienability and inalinability, also questionable on the basis of phenomena concerning ordinary nouns.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
[1]
Farkas, J. and Alberti, G. 2017. Generalizations on potential possessee variants in Hungarian. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat. 4, 1 (Jun. 2017), 59–79. DOI:https://doi.org/10.14232/JENY.2017.1.5.
Issue
Vol. 4 No. 1 (2017)
Section
Article
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Author Biographies

Judit Farkas, University of Pécs, Department of Linguistics

Judit Farkas (PhD) is now an assistant professor at the University of Pécs, but when the first version of the article was written, she worked for the Research Institute for Linguistics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences (employed in the OTKA project Comprehensive Grammar Resources: Hungarian). She permanently works in historical linguistics projects and conducts research into the application of current results of Hungarian generative linguistics to public education.

Gábor Alberti, University of Pécs, Department of Linguistics

Gábor Alberti (DSc) is a professor of linguistics at the University of Pécs, where he heads the Department of Linguistics, the Linguistics Doctoral School, and the ReALIS Theoretical, Computational and Cognitive Linguistics Research Team. In addition to formal, lexical and discourse semantics research, he also takes part in the generative syntactic description of the Hungarian language, currently as a senior member of the OTKA project Comprehensive Grammar Resources: Hungarian.

References

Alberti, Gábor – Judit Farkas megj. előtt. Derivation of nouns. In Tibor Laczkó – Gábor Alberti (szerk.) Nouns and Noun Phrases. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Alberti Gábor – Farkas Judit 2015. Az elidegeníthető birtoklást kifejező -j- képző esete a -(Vt)t főnévképzővel és más főnévképzőkkel. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 2:1–30.

Bliss, Heather – Bettina Gruber 2015. Temporal restrictions on personal pronouns: The composition of Blackfoot proclitics. Lingua 156:175–199.

Broekhuis, Hans – Evelin Keizer – Marcel den Dikken 2012. Syntax of Dutch – Nouns and Noun Phrases. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Dikken, Marcel den 2015. The morphosyntax of (in)alienably possessed noun phrases: The Hungarian contribution. In Katalin É. Kiss – Balázs Surányi – Éva Dékány (szerk.) Approaches to Hungarian 14. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 121–145.

Dowty, David 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67/3:547–619.

Haspelmath, Martin 2008. Syntactic Universals and Usage Frequency: 3. Alienable vs. inalienable possessive constructions. Előadás. Leipzig Spring School on Linguistic Diversity. Leipzig. https://goo.gl/Bch8Lc

Kiefer Ferenc 2000. Jelentéselmélet. Budapest: Corvina.

Komlósy András 1992. Régensek és vonzatok. In Kiefer Ferenc (szerk.) Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 1. Mondattan. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 299–527.

Kosztolányi Dezső 1934. Anya és anyája stb. Pesti Hírlap. 1934. szeptember 23.

Kratzer, Angelika 1996. Severing the external argument from its verb. In Johan Rooryck – Laurie Zaring (szerk.) Phrase Structure and the Lexicon. (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 33) Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 109–137.

Laczkó Tibor 2000a. Az ige argumentumszerkezetét megőrző főnévképzés. In Kiefer Ferenc (szerk.) Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3. Morfológia. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 293–407.

Laczkó Tibor 2000b. Zárójelezési paradoxonok. In Kiefer Ferenc (szerk.) Strukturális magyar nyelvtan 3. Morfológia. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 619–651.

Laczkó, Tibor – Gábor Alberti (szerk.) megj. előtt. Nouns and Noun Phrases. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

Marantz, Alec 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Rebrus Péter 2013. Miért nincs j? In Benő Attila – Fazakas Emese – Kádár Edit (szerk.) „...hogy legyen a víznek lefolyása...” Köszöntő kötet Szilágyi N. Sándor tiszteletére. Kolozsvár: Erdélyi Múzeum-Egyesület Kiadó. 383–401.

Schirm Anita 2005. Az elidegeníthető és az elidegeníthetetlen birtoklás kifejezésmódjairól. Nyelvtudomány 1:155–169.