Dimensions of Possession Irène Baron 2025 pdf

download

https://ebookfinal.com/download/dimensions-of-possession-irene-
baron/

★★★★★
4.9 out of 5.0 (58 reviews )

Instant PDF Access

ebookfinal.com
 Dimensions of Possession Irène Baron

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 ACADEMIC EDITION – LIMITED RELEASE

Available Instantly Access Library

Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebookfinal

MacMillan Destination C1 C2 Grammar Vocabulary Malcolm

Mann

https://ebookfinal.com/download/macmillan-destination-c1-c2-grammar-
vocabulary-malcolm-mann/

Autobiographical International Relations I IR 1st Edition

Naeem Inayatullah

https://ebookfinal.com/download/autobiographical-international-
relations-i-ir-1st-edition-naeem-inayatullah/

Spirit Possession around the World Possession Communion

and Demon Expulsion across Cultures Joseph Laycock

https://ebookfinal.com/download/spirit-possession-around-the-world-
possession-communion-and-demon-expulsion-across-cultures-joseph-
laycock/

Annual Reports on NMR Spectroscopy Volume 83 1st Edition

Webb

https://ebookfinal.com/download/annual-reports-on-nmr-spectroscopy-
volume-83-1st-edition-webb/
The Gospel of the Ghouls First Edition Baron & Baronessa
Araignee

https://ebookfinal.com/download/the-gospel-of-the-ghouls-first-
edition-baron-baronessa-araignee/

Using the TI 83 Plus TI 84 Plus Christopher R. Mitchell

https://ebookfinal.com/download/using-the-ti-83-plus-ti-84-plus-
christopher-r-mitchell/

Services Marketing Text and Cases Steve Baron

https://ebookfinal.com/download/services-marketing-text-and-cases-
steve-baron/

External Possession 1st Edition Doris L. Payne (Ed.)

https://ebookfinal.com/download/external-possession-1st-edition-doris-
l-payne-ed/

Rural Dimensions of Welfare Reform Bruce A. Weber

https://ebookfinal.com/download/rural-dimensions-of-welfare-reform-
bruce-a-weber/
Dimensions of Possession Irène Baron Digital Instant
Download
Author(s): Irène Baron, Michael Herslund, Finn Sørensen
ISBN(s): 9781588110626, 1588110621
Edition: Kindle
File Details: PDF, 3.37 MB
Year: 2001
Language: english
<DOCINFO

AUTHOR ""

TITLE "Dimensions of Possession"

SUBJECT "Typological Studies in Language, Volume 47"

KEYWORDS ""

SIZE HEIGHT "220"

WIDTH "150"

VOFFSET "4">

Dimensions of Possession
Typological Studies in Language (TSL)
A companion series to the journal Studies in Language

General Editor Michael Noonan

Assistant Editors Spike Gildea, Suzanne Kemmer

Editorial Board
Wallace Chafe (Santa Barbara) Ronald Langacker (San Diego)
Bernard Comrie (Leipzig) Charles Li (Santa Barbara)
R. M. W. Dixon (Canberra) Andrew Pawley (Canberra)
Matthew Dryer (Buffalo) Doris Payne (Oregon)
John Haiman (St Paul) Frans Plank (Konstanz)
Kenneth Hale (Cambridge, Mass.) Jerrold Sadock (Chicago)
Bernd Heine (Köln) Dan Slobin (Berkeley)
Paul Hopper (Pittsburgh) Sandra Thompson (Santa Barbara)
Andrej Kibrik (Moscow)

Volumes in this series will be functionally and typologically oriented, covering

specific topics in language by collecting together data from a wide variety of
languages and language typologies. The orientation of the volumes will be
substantive rather than formal, with the aim of investigating universals of
human language via as broadly defined a data base as possible, leaning toward
cross-linguistic, diachronic, developmental and live-discourse data.

Volume 47
Dimensions of Possession
Edited by Irène Baron, Michael Herslund and Finn Sørensen
Dimensions of Possession

Edited by

Irène Baron
Michael Herslund
Finn Sørensen
Copenhagen Business School

John Benjamins Publishing Company

Amsterdam
/
Philadelphia
 TM The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American
8

National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed

Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Dimensions of Possession / edited by Irène Baron, Michael Herslund and Finn Sørensen.
p. cm. (Typological Studies in Language, issn 0167–7373 ; v. 47)
Includes bibliographical references and indexes.
1. Grammar, Comparative and general--Possessives. I. Baron, Irène. II.
Herslund, Michael. III. Sørensen, Finn, 1942- IV. Series.

P299.P67 D56 2001

415--dc21 2001035089
isbn 90 272 29511 (Eur.) / 1 58811 0621 (US) (Hb; alk. paper)
© 2001 – John Benjamins B.V.
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any
other means, without written permission from the publisher.
John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O.Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands
John Benjamins North America · P.O.Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa
 Table of Contents

Introduction: Dimensions of possession 1

Michael Herslund and Irène Baron
1. The operational basis of possession:
A dimensional approach revisited 27
Hansjakob Seiler
2. The concept of possession in Danish grammar 41
Ole Togeby
3. Possession spaces in Danish 57
Finn Sørensen
4. The verb have in Nyulnyulan languages 67
William McGregor
5. Semantics of the verb have 85
Irène Baron and Michael Herslund
6. Possessum-oriented and possessor-oriented constructions
in Russian 99
Per Durst-Andersen
7. Datives and comitatives as neighbouring spouses
The case of indirect objects and comitatives in Danish 115
Lars Heltoft
8. Towards a typology of French NP de NP structures or how much
possession is there in complex noun phrases with de in French? 147
Inge Bartning
9. Spanish N de N structures from a cognitive perspective 169
Henrik Høeg Müller
10. The grammatical category “Possession’’
and the part–whole relation in French 187
Martin Riegel
vi Contents

11. Kinship in grammar 201

Östen Dahl and Maria Koptjevskaja-Tamm
12. (In)alienability and (in)determination in Portuguese 227
Anne-Marie Spanoghe
13. Possessives with extensive use:
A source of definite articles? 243
Kari Fraurud
14. Possessors and experiencers in Classical Latin 269
A. Machtelt Bolkestein
15. The difference a category makes in the expression
of possession and inalienability 285
Marianne Mithun
16. Ways of explaining possession 311
Bernd Heine
Index of languages 329
Index of authors 331
Index of subjects 334
 Introduction
Dimensions of possession

Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

. Introduction

Possession is a very elusive notion. It is a complex and vague notion which in

order to be expressed has to draw on different linguistic structures. For there
is namely no such thing as an established possessive construction in the same
sense as there are locational or equational structures which can be identified
by their linguistic material, cf. the contribution to the present volume by
Sørensen. Whether it is approached from the semasiological or the
onomasiological angle, the problems present themselves immediately. The
semasiological approach seems offhand hopeless because of the mere fact that
no form or construction in any language conveys exclusively what everybody
would agree on identifying as possession. And one could argue, as does
Togeby in the present volume, that in a language like Danish possession is not
at all grammaticalised. As is well known, even the genitive, which, where it
exists, should be the expression of possession par excellence has in most
languages numerous uses unlikely to qualify as possessive. And the same is
true of predicative constructions with verbs with the general meaning ‘have’,
which also have numerous uses that only with difficulty can be reconciled with
a common pretheoretical understanding of possession.
Since possession is inherently a concept, not a linguistic construction, the
only way to approach it seems to be from the onomasiological angle. This
approach is consequently the one chosen by most grammarians and linguists.
Starting from an intuitive notion of possession, the domain is made more precise
by listing the different kinds of relations which seem to fall under such a com-
mon notion. This is true of traditional grammarians as well as of modern
linguists. An example of the first category is Nygaard’s characterisation of the
possessive genitive from his syntax of Old Norse: “In connection with a noun
 Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

having a concrete meaning the genitive is used with the name of the person or
thing, to whom or which something belongs or is related by virtue of ownership
— family relation — friendship or enmity — superior or subaltern position —
origin, source, reason, cause — natural or necessary (conceptual) connection —
established order or a relation created by circumstances’’ (1906: 129). As an
example of the second category, the modern linguists, one can quote Seiler’s
characterisation: “Semantically, the domain of POSSESSION can be defined as
bio-cultural. It is the relationship between a human being and his kinsmen, his
body parts, his material belongings, his cultural and intellectual products. In a
more extended view, it is the relationship between parts and wholes of an
organism’’ (1983a: 4). Such conceptual delimitations of possession can finally be
coined into something like the seven types of predicative possession identified by
Heine (1997: 34 ff.): Physical possession, Temporary possession, Permanent posses-
sion, Inalienable possession, Abstract possession, Inanimate inalienable possession,
Inanimate alienable possession. Some of these are of course less prototypical than
others: there may be less agreement among linguists on the proper inclusion into
the realm of possession of the Abstract possession (I have no time, I have a cold) or
the Inanimate alienable possession (The tree has crows on it). The prototypical case
of possession is expounded as a cluster of properties such as ‘human possessor,
concrete possessee, possessor having the right to use the possessee, spatial
proximity between the two, no temporal limit on the possessive relation’ (Heine
1997: 39 ff.). This characterisation is also close to Seiler’s: “Linguistic POSSES-
SION consists of the representation of a relationship between a substance and
another substance. Substance A, called the POSSESSOR, is prototypically
[+ animate], more specifically [+ human], and still more specifically [+ EGO] or
close to the speaker’’ (1983a: 4 and this volume). As the comparisons show, the
traditional grammarians’ insight is not conspicuously inferior to that of the
modern linguists’. It is of course the same problem that they are facing.
Following Seiler we can say that what is normally called possession is the
linguistic expression of the relation between two entities, a Possessor and a
Possessum, such that one, the Possessor, is seen as being in some way related
to the other, the Possessum, as having it near or controlling it. The kind of
relation between the two can be of various sorts, as the possibilities listed by
Nygaard quoted above, but is often deducible from the combined lexical
content of the Possessor and the Possessum nouns, cf. Baron and Herslund
(this volume). We can illustrate this by three simple examples:
(1) a. Mary has a daughter.
Mary’s daughter
 Introduction 

b. Mary has a house.

Mary’s house
c. Mary has a pen.
Mary’s pen

In (1a) the relational noun daughter induces a kinship reading in both the
predicative and the attributive expression. In (1b) the noun house induces an
ownership reading in the predicative expression, but the corresponding
attributive expression is much more polysemous. In (1c) finally, the word pen
can in the predicative construction induce an ownership reading as in (4b),
but the availability reading, i.e. ‘Mary has a pen at her disposal right now’, is
more probable, and the same is true of the attributive phrase, viz. ‘You can use
Mary’s pen. Her name is on it’ (ownership) or ‘Mary isn’t here right now, but
there is a pen on her desk. We can use Mary’s pen’ (availability).
But as soon as one moves on from rather simple cases like these, numer-
ous problems occur. One source of such problems is the fundamentally
polysemous nature of the verbs occurring in predicative possessive expres-
sions such as English have. In many languages, a have verb has at least three
distinct uses of which two are not clearly of the possessive kind. The first use
is the one illustrated in (2), i.e. a stative relation between two distinct
entities:
(2) [Mary] has [a cat].

This is what we regard as prototypical possession corresponding with Heine’s

permanent possession, cf. above. The second use is the situation where the
construction only denotes one entity in a certain state:
(3) [Mary] has a cold.

This is the case of ‘abstract possession’, cf. Heine (1997: 34), but it is debatable
whether it should be included in the concept of possession, or whether, rather,
the Possessum in such cases merges with the verb to form a verbo-nominal
predicate, cf. Baron and Herslund (1998). It is true, however, that there exists
an attributive expression in such cases just as in the case of possession proper,
viz. Mary’s cold and Mary’s cat.
The third case is the use of have as an auxiliary verb:
(4) [Mary] has bought a cat.

This construction can historically be traced back to a possessive construction,

i.e. a construction where the object is only the object of have, the participle
 Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

being the complement of the object: Mary has [a cat bought]. But it seems best
to disregard it in a discussion of possession, because the have-part of it now
clearly involves only one entity in a state: the other entity, a cat in (4), is
related to the first entity not by have, but by the lexical verb. It is the lexical
meaning of the verb buy which accounts for the possessive content of (4),
which accordingly disappears when other verbs are chosen:
(5) Mary has {seen, fed, caressed, chased . . .} a cat.

The following discussion of possession is, like the articles in the present
volume, articulated along the three major dimensions which constitute the
principal linguistic realisations of possession: predicative possession
(Section 2), attributive possession (Section 3) and the constructions “in
between’’, i.e. the phenomena variously labelled external possession or
possessor ascension (Section 4).

. Predicative possession

As seen above, possession occurs in both predicative and attributive construc-

tions, i.e. the possessive relation is either expressed by a verb, hence explicitly
asserted, or by a nominal (a genitive phrase), in which case the relation is
presupposed. As seen in the examples above, the attributive construction is
therefore inherently much more polysemous than the predicative one, cf.
Heine (1997: 25 ff.). We return to this question in 3.1.

. Possessor, Location and Experiencer

Whereas predicative possession, i.e. the asserted relation between a Possessor

and a Possessum, is often realised by the Agent–Patient role schema, there are
two other basic role configurations which seem to be of more immediate
importance for the interpretation of possession:

Location – Argument
Experiencer – Stimulus
Figure 1.

These two patterns have one interesting and quite fundamental property in
common with possessive structures. Possession involves, as seen above, the
relation between two entities, but these two entities are only assigned the roles
 Introduction 

of Possessor and Possessum in virtue of one another, i.e. there is no Possessor

without a Possessum, no Possessum without a Possessor. Seiler (1983a: 4)
speaks in fact of a “strictly binary relation’’. There is thus a basic solidarity in
the underlying semantic role schema which is also found in the case of
Location-Argument and Experiencer-Stimulus. Nothing is a place until
something is placed there, thus becoming the argument, as it were, of the place
(cf. Guillet and Leclère 1992; Baron and Herslund 1997a: 135): in e.g. The book
is on the table, the table denotes only a place by virtue of the book being placed
upon it. Nothing is an experiencer until a stimulus is present, and nothing is
a stimulus if not perceived as such: in e.g. The noise scared Sharon, the noise
denotes an objectively occurring physical phenomenon, which only obtains the
status of stimulus by being perceived and reacted to. In this respect, the Agent-
Patient role schema as referred to above, is however quite different: something
can be an agent without the presence of a patient, viz. Peter jumps, and
something can be a patient without any identifiable agent, viz. The water
evaporates. The conclusion is of course that possession has more in common
with the Location and Experiencer schemata than with the Agent schema. And
it is the Location schema which, as the simplest and most primitive and
concrete notion, seems more basic, hence the traditional and widespread idea
that possession is a kind of “sophisticated’’ Location (cf. among others Lyons
1967, 1968; Clark 1978; Freeze 1992; Spanoghe 1995: 30 ff.; Baron and
Herslund 1997a; Sørensen 1997a), whereas other scholars admit that location
is important in connection with possession, but that possession cannot be
reduced to it, cf. in particular Isačenko (1974), Seiler (1983a), Heine (1997)
and Heltoft (this volume).

..
The first argument in favour of a locative interpretation of possession is the
observation that many languages exhibit striking structural resemblances
between existential, locative and possessive constructions, cf. e.g. Lyons
(1967); Christie (1970); Clark (1978). Existentials are often found to pattern
with one kind of possessive construction whereas locatives pattern with
another, as regards word order, definiteness of the Possessum as well as choice
of verb (cf. Clark 1978). This can be illustrated by French:
(6) a. Existential
Il y a un livre sur la table.
it there has a book on the table
‘There is a book on the table’
 Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

Possessive1
Jean a un livre.
‘Jean has a book’
b. Locative
Le livre est sur la table.
‘The book is on the table’
Possessive2
Le livre est à Jean.
the book is to Jean
‘The book is Jean’s’

In the a-examples un livre ‘a book’ is indefinite and follows the locative

marker y,1 which anticipates the locative phrase sur la table ‘on the table’, as
well as the Possessor subject Jean. In the b-examples le livre ‘the book’ is
definite and precedes the locative sur la table ‘on the table’ as well as the
Possessor à Jean. These patterns are no coincidence: whereas many languages
have the same verb in all four cases, some have two different verbs manifest-
ing the pattern shown in (6), where one verb appears in the existential and
the possessive1 (the have-construction), another in the locative and the
possessive2 (the be-construction). And in languages with two verbs, it is
never the case that “the existential and possessive2 [. . .] appear as a pair’’
(Clark 1978: 109).

..
A second argument for the basically locative nature of possession takes its
point of departure in Benveniste’s (1966a) observation that have is an
inverted be.2 If have is an inverted be, then the passive of have should be
equivalent to a be-clause, i.e. have an existential meaning. Now, passives of
have are rare, probably due to the fact that have like be is a state verb, and
such verbs are not readily passivisable. Yet, the Danish verb have has a passive,
haves, which occurs in restricted uses with the meaning ‘be’, ‘exist’, ‘be
available’, i.e. precisely in existential constructions:3
(7) Røget fisk haves.
smoked fish have-pass
‘Smoked fish for sale’
Den kvalitet haves ikke.
that quality have-pass neg
‘That quality is not available’
 Introduction 

As seen in (7), the passive of have occurs, like most passives, normally without
an agent-phrase. But one interesting thing about the demoted subject of an
active clause is that its “true nature’’, its semantic role, in many languages is so
to speak revealed in the passive where it is realised as an oblique complement.
So the active subject of locative verbs like Danish rumme, indeholde ‘contain’
will in the passive not have the normal agentive preposition af ‘by’, but rather
a locative preposition like i ‘in’:4
(8) Active
a. Det er utroligt hvad den bil rummer.
it is incredible what that car contains
‘It is incredible how much that car contains’
b. Kassen indeholder tredive flasker.
box-def contains thirty bottle-pl
‘The box contains thirty bottles’
Passive
c. Det er utroligt hvad der rummes i den bil.
it is incredible what there contain-pass in that car
‘It is incredible how much is contained in that car’
d. Tredive flasker indeholdes i kassen.
thirty bottle-pl contain-pass in box-def
‘Thirty bottles are contained in the box’

This is true also of the passive of have :

(9) a. Den kvalitet haves i alle butikker.
that quality have-pass in all shop-pl
‘That quality is found in all shops’
b. Oplysninger haves hos indehaveren.5
information have-pass at owner-def
‘Information available from the owner’

These facts seem to indicate the profound locative nature of have. A further
piece of evidence is the fact that certain have-clauses with a definite object
actually convey a rather concrete locative meaning insofar as they answer
questions in where, cf. Wierzbicka (1988: 345):
(10) – Where are the children?
– John has them/the children.
 Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

Such data also seem to contradict Isačenko’s contention (1974: 76) that have
no longer denotes relative positions in space.

..
Apart from the arguments for the locative nature of possession, even in
have-constructions, adduced so far, there is a further argument in favour of a
locative interpretation in the shape of the notion of Sub-Place often found in
have-constructions. This notion covers the case of prepositional complements
which specify the actual location of the Possessum. The Possessum is thus
represented as located, first, in a possessive relation to the Possessor, and then in
a locative relation with respect to another place. Different patterns of deno-
tational inclusion can be identified in such constructions. In examples like (11):

(11) a. The bank has a branch in Bristol.

b. Mary has a child on her lap.

A branch in (11a) is denotatively included in the bank via a Part–Whole

relation and locally situated by in Bristol; in (11b) it is her lap which is
denotatively included in the subject in a Part–Whole relation whereas the
object is simply located with respect to the subject by have and with respect to
her lap by the local preposition on, cf. Baron and Herslund (1997b) and this
volume. Such structures are neatly explained under the assumption that have
is a basically locative verb which can be accompanied by a sub-place which
locates the object noun. This notion of sub-place only makes sense if there also
is a place. And this place can only be the subject of have. The property of
combining with a sub-place is shared by stative locative verbs such as English
contain, keep, etc.:
(12) He has his money in an old sock.
The museum contains some fine pieces in its Degas collection.
He keeps his goats in a garden shed.

The fact that have-constructions display an apparent Agent-Patient configu-

ration, i.e. a transitive construction with a non-local verb originally meaning
‘take, grasp’, is often adduced as an argument against the locative nature of
possession, cf. e.g. the contribution by Heltoft. This argument is however
weakened by the fact that uncontroversial locative relations can also be
expressed by a transitive schema in languages which have chosen this way of
expressing possession, cf. English verbs like contain, hold, keep, occupy (a
position), etc. Since the transitive Agent-Patient schema thus covers both
 Introduction 

possession and location, it cannot be used as an argument in favour of the

non-locative nature of possession. There are, on the contrary, as shown by the
data adduced so far good reasons for believing that the subject of have is
semantically a Location only posing syntactically as an Agent.

. The two-sided nature of possession: have vs. belong

A major distinction within predicative possession is the one between have

and belong constructions, i.e. on the one hand constructions with the
Possessor as topic and grammatical subject, on the other constructions having
the Possessum as topic and subject. This distinction is reminiscent of the two
possessive structures, the existential and the locative, discussed in 2.1.1 above.
And historically, it seems primary insofar as it can be traced back to the
earliest Indo-European, cf. Benveniste (1949, 1966a); Baron (1997: 117). But
also cross-linguistically it seems fundamental: it is apparently found in all
languages (Heine 1997: 33), although Isačenko (1974: 64 f.) expresses some
serious reservations as to its universality.
There seems to be a characteristic asymmetry between the two construc-
tions, as contended e.g. by Seiler (1983a: 61 ff.): whereas have-constructions
tend to be very polysemous, but to include ownership in their meaning, cf.
Heine (1997: 32), belong-constructions are more restricted denoting only
ownership, i.e. a sub-category of possession. We do not think, however, that
the importance of the asymmetry should be exaggerated. belong is indeed
polysemous and is not restricted to expressing ownership, at least in the
European languages we are familiar with: Eng. belong, Fr. appartenir, Span.
pertenecer, Germ. gehören, Dan. tilhøre, all have both (concrete) locative and
possessive meanings, the two being often distinguished by partially different
constructions. This is for instance the case in French, where two different
choices of clitics, lui and y, reveal the possessive and the locative readings
respectively (cf. Kotschi 1981: 93). And a similar distinction is found in
Danish, where the systematic alternation between a verbal prefix, with a
predominantly abstract meaning, and a postverbal particle, with a predomi-
nantly concrete meaning, is put to use in order to distinguish the possessive
from the (concrete) locative meaning of the verb:
(13) French
a. Cette équipe, Jean y appartient.
this team Jean there belongs
‘This team, Jean belongs (= is part of) to it’
 Michael Herslund and Irène Baron

b. Cette équipe, Jean lui appartient.

this team Jean it-dat belongs
‘This team, Jean belongs (=is the property of) to it’
Danish
a. Bogen tilhører biblioteket.
Book-def belongs library-def
‘The book belongs to the library’
b. Bogen hører til på nederste hylde.
Book-def belongs to on bottom shelf
‘The book belongs on the bottom shelf ’
cf. also the different translations and choice of preposition in the two cases in
English.
Even if the two verbs share a common core of meaning, i.e. location and
ownership, belong seems to be more concrete than have, to be more of a
“fully’’ lexical verb than have (cf. Isačenko 1974: 64 f. and Seiler 1983a: 62 ff.),
the latter having, as may be seen, a larger array of increasingly abstract
meanings:

HAVE BELONG
Location
Ownership
Availability
Kinship
Abstract
possession
...
Figure 2.

Basically however, the two verbs seem to be converses and to constitute what
looks very much like a voice distinction: the transitive have-construction
topicalises the Possessor, as the active topicalises the Agent, whereas the
intransitive belong-construction topicalises the Possessum as the passive
topicalises the Patient. And it seems indeed natural that the be-
long-construction and the passive should both have a more restricted
meaning potential than the have-construction and the active, because the
occurrence of the different constructions is determined by the lexical content
of their subjects, and the possible class of subjects of belong, the Possessum,
is inherently less “topic-worthy’’ than that of have, the Possessor. As the
 Introduction 

passive is a marked choice vis-à-vis the active, the belong-construction is

marked vis-à-vis the have-construction, and is therefore more restricted and
precise in meaning.
But one could ask what exactly it is that makes ‘ownership’ contrary to
‘availability, kinship, etc.’, so important that it can be lexically expressed in
two diametrically opposite ways, i.e. why is it precisely the ownership sub-
meaning of possession that exhibits a lexical choice? The answer could be that
the ownership relation is central and even prototypical (cf. Bartning 1993: 78 ff.
and Heine 1997: 39) because ownership — of course a very culture dependent
notion — is the most salient representative of the possessive relation, i.e. a
basically locative relation between two distinct entities enriched with “some-
thing more’’, this “more’’ being of an institutionalised or legal sense. Owner-
ship constitutes thus a central point on the semantic scale stretching from
inalienable possession, or the Part–Whole relation, to mere availability:

Part–Whole Ownership Availability

< >
Figure 3.

As seen in Figure 2 above, belong selects only the ownership meaning,

besides its basic locative meaning, and is, as the marked choice, necessary
when this meaning is crucial, cf. (14):
(14) This watch was your father’s, so now it belongs to you.
?This watch was your father’s, so now you have it.

The concept of ‘ownership’, which occupies the central point on the scale of
Figure 3, thus seems important enough to be expressible in two different
ways by a lexical opposition between an unmarked (have) and a marked
(belong) member. But it is, again, the two-sided nature of possession, the
solidarity between Possessor and Possessum, which makes this opposition
available. And the unmarked status of have in this opposition does not
necessarily amount to its reduction to a kind of copular verb, as pointed out
by McGregor in his study of the verb have in languages of the Australian
North-West.
The marked status of belong-constructions is also related to the fact that
languages with a have-verb seem to have developed such a verb precisely in
order to align their possessive and experiential construction with their canoni-
cal agentive pattern, viz. John has a boat and John feels a pain on a par with
John makes a boat, thereby identifying the three major semantic functions
Random documents with unrelated
content Scribd suggests to you:
 Education - Concept Map
Winter 2025 - Research Center

Prepared by: Researcher Smith

Date: July 28, 2025

Review 1: Experimental procedures and results

Learning Objective 1: Experimental procedures and results
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Learning Objective 2: Key terms and definitions
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Learning Objective 3: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Learning Objective 4: Historical development and evolution
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 4: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Learning Objective 5: Statistical analysis and interpretation
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Key terms and definitions
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 6: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 7: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Historical development and evolution
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Introduction 2: Literature review and discussion
Key Concept: Research findings and conclusions
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 11: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Note: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 12: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Example 12: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 13: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Example 13: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 14: Study tips and learning strategies
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Research findings and conclusions
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Definition: Current trends and future directions
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Example 17: Practical applications and examples
• Learning outcomes and objectives
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 18: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Practice Problem 18: Practical applications and examples
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Note: Research findings and conclusions
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Chapter 3: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
Definition: Experimental procedures and results
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 21: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Experimental procedures and results
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 22: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Theoretical framework and methodology
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Theoretical framework and methodology
• Key terms and definitions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Literature review and discussion
• Learning outcomes and objectives
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 25: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Key terms and definitions
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Key Concept: Study tips and learning strategies
• Learning outcomes and objectives
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Ethical considerations and implications
• Study tips and learning strategies
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Key Concept: Key terms and definitions
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 30: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
References 4: Assessment criteria and rubrics
Key Concept: Fundamental concepts and principles
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Remember: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Research findings and conclusions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Remember: Current trends and future directions
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Important: Research findings and conclusions
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
[Figure 36: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Remember: Experimental procedures and results
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 37: Critical analysis and evaluation
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 38: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Important: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Practice Problem 39: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Ethical considerations and implications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Module 5: Case studies and real-world applications
Example 40: Historical development and evolution
• Problem-solving strategies and techniques
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 41: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Practice Problem 41: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Assessment criteria and rubrics
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Important: Literature review and discussion
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Important: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Key Concept: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Practical applications and examples
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
[Figure 45: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Key Concept: Key terms and definitions
• Key terms and definitions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Key terms and definitions
• Experimental procedures and results
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Practice Problem 47: Learning outcomes and objectives
• Fundamental concepts and principles
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Practice Problem 48: Key terms and definitions
• Case studies and real-world applications
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Study tips and learning strategies
• Interdisciplinary approaches
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Section 6: Learning outcomes and objectives
Practice Problem 50: Best practices and recommendations
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Note: Case studies and real-world applications
• Historical development and evolution
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Comparative analysis and synthesis
• Comparative analysis and synthesis
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
[Figure 53: Diagram/Chart/Graph]
Practice Problem 53: Problem-solving strategies and techniques
• Current trends and future directions
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Definition: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Statistical analysis and interpretation
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Practice Problem 55: Assessment criteria and rubrics
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Formula: [Mathematical expression or equation]
Example 56: Research findings and conclusions
• Best practices and recommendations
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
- Note: Important consideration
Remember: Theoretical framework and methodology
• Theoretical framework and methodology
- Sub-point: Additional details and explanations
- Example: Practical application scenario
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebookfinal.com