Uniqueness and possession: Typological evidence for type shifts in nominal determination

Abstract

This paper highlights the analogy of definiteness and possession by utilising the distinction between semantic and pragmatic uniqueness as outlined in Löbner’s (2011) Concept Type and Determination approach. Assuming, on the basis of the features [± unique] and [± relational], a classification into the four logical types sortal, relational, individual, and functional concept, nouns will be used either in congruence with or deviating from their underlying type. I present evidence from Germanic and Mayan languages for the following claims: (1) noun uses that deviate from the underlying type tend to be reflected by overt morphology; (2) in article split languages, phonologically ‘strong’ forms indicate pragmatic uniqueness, thus, denote a function from [− unique] to [+ unique], whereas ‘weak’ forms tend to be semantically redundant. Regarding possession, ‘alienable’ morphology denotes a function from non-relational to relational (pragmatic possession), whereas ‘inalienable’ morphology is restricted to semantic possession. Overall, split systems imply a strong correlation between conceptual markedness and morphosyntactic markedness.