تسجيل الدخول

تسجيل

Possession of a nominalization: summary

المؤلف:  R.M.W. Dixon

المصدر:  A Semantic approach to English grammar

الجزء والصفحة:  337-10

2023-04-12

1611

Possession of a nominalization: summary

We have seen that all but two of the nine varieties of deverbal nominalization take part in a possessive construction—marked by ’s or a possessive pronoun—with an argument of the underlying verb. A possessive relation is also lacking for Locus-nom’s of type (iii).

 

That is, we have:

. Unit-nom’s and Activity-nom’s. Possessor can be in S, A or O relation, if these arguments satisfy the conditions for use of ’s,. Examples are at (4), (6) and (7).

 

. State-nom’s. The Experiencer role can be possessor—this is the underlying A argument for a LIKING verb (for example, Mary’s fear of the dark) and the underlying O argument for an ANNOYING verb (John’s surprise at the news).

 

. Property-nom’s. If underlying S or A argument has an appropriate referent, it can be a possessor; for example, [John’s exact measurement of the artefact] was appreciated.

 

. Object-nom’s. If the referent of the A argument is human (or animate), singular and specific then it may be a possessor—Santa Claus’ gifts, the missionary’s converts.

 

. Locus-nom’s. For type (i) the underlying S argument can be possessor (my residence). For type (ii) it is just possible to have the underlying O as possessor (the church’s entrance).

 

. Agent-nom. The O of the underlying verb can be possessor, if it has an appropriate referent—our leader, Goliath’s opponent, (I am) mother’s washer upper.

 

Type (e) of possession involves ‘something typically associated with the possessor’. This covers my general (said by a soldier), my men (said by a general), my doctor (said by a patient) and my patients (said by a doctor). That is, we have:

 

If John employs Bill, then John is Bill’s employer and Bill is John’s employee.

This shows the intertwining of strands within the grammar. A grammar is not like a machine with wheels and pulleys and shuttles; neither is it like a building with bricks and doors and roof. The aptest metaphor is of a tree with branches and leaves, threaded through by vines and ferns which compete for movement and light. Indeed, a grammar—an inalienable attribute of a community of humans—is a living organism, constantly shifting and adapting.