Search
| # | Search | Downloads | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Possessive markers in Permic languages are widely used outside the contexts that have been described as possessive relations (Aikhenvald, Dixon, 2013). In particular, they can signal definiteness (Schlachter,1960; Suihkonen, 2005; Edygarova, 2010; Winkler, 2011). As a consequence, there are works that consider the hypothesis of grammaticalization of possessive markers in Permic as definite articles (Fraurud, 2001). However, they can be used in contexts that require an indefinite reading: first, they encode indefinite elements of a definite set or part of a mass; second, they occur with indefinite and interrogative pronouns; and third, they are used with quantifiers and numerals (in contexts of indefiniteness). The present paper offers an explanation for this phenomenon. The work is based on the data of the Pechora dialect of Komi-Zyrian and the Beserman dialect of Udmurt. Both the elicitation and corpus methods are used. The Permic possessive markers do not exhibit exhaustivity, which is observed with possessive pronouns in English, French and other languages (Simonenko, 2017; Simonenko in press). They can denote an indefinite part of a definite mass or an indefinite subset of a definite set (e.g., there were some stones in the barrel, and he took a stone). Hence, they can be used with numerals, quantifiers and pronouns that can introduce an indefinite part of a definite set or mass (e.g. which of them, one of them, someone of them). In all those contexts the possessive markers are used as referential devices, rather than markers of definiteness. Hence, their functions are adequately described in terms of reference, rather than in terms of definiteness. Keywords: Uralic languages, Udmurt, Komi-Zyrian, syntax, possessive suffixes, quantifier, noun phrase, definiteness, indefiniteness, reference, referential properties | 1171 | ||||