From: Brian M. Scott
Message: 32188
Date: 2004-04-22
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 enlil@... wrote:From Richard's post
>> Richard:
>>> The only hope for a version of Glen's analysis is that
>>> our common sense is warped by the rarity, as opposed to
>>> non-existence of, of relative clauses expressing
>>> genitive relationships in which the possessum, not the
>>> possessor, is marked.
>> This is ONLY if you analyse the phrase one way. There's
>> also a possibility based on normal IE word order if we
>> can tell at all that a theoretical preform */wlkW&s ya
>> hWa:kWs/ meant "wolf('s) with his eye" where *ya actually
>> did refer to "at his/hers/its/one's/someone's" and
>> modified the possessum like in the Hungarian example.
> What Hungarian example? I don't think we ever saw it.
> Hungarian has a sort of anti-genitive; the construct isBrian
> possessor[-GEN] + possession-HIS
> HIS = 3rd person possessive suffix.
> GEN = 'genitive' ( = 'dative') marker
> Note the optionality of the marking.