University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Calgary (Working) Papers in Linguistics Volume 05, Spring 1979 1979-05 Towards a reanalysis of Oceanic possessives MacDonald, Lorna A University of Calgary MacDonald, L. A. (1979). Towards a reanalysis of Oceanic possessives. Calgary Working Papers in Linguistics, 5(Spring), 1-18. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/51278 journal article Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca Towards a Reanalysis of Oceanic Possessives Lorna A. MacDonald 1.0 Introduction The Oceanic languages, which constitute a major subgroup of the Austronesian language family, consist of over 400 languages spoken in Micronesia, Melanesia and Polynesia. Although the exact subgrouping of Oceanic is uncertain, Pawley (1972) provides support for an Eastern Oceanic subgroup, which consists of languages from the Southeast Solomon Islands, the New Hebrides and Banks Islands, Polynesia, and Fiji, as well as Rotuman and Oilbertese (Pawley 1972:7). 1.1 Previous Studies Pawley has done extensive research on the reconstruction of both Proto-Oceanic (POC) and Proto-Eastern Oceanic (PEO) (1973, 1972). Included in these studies are reconstructions of the possessive systems of both POC and PEO. Throughout this paper, I have relied heavily on these reconstruc­ tions, and frequently draw upon them for examples. The reconstruction of the PEO possessive system is fairly detailed. In the POC reconstruction available to me, however,,only those construc­ tions with pronominal possessors are discussed extensively. However, Pawley states that the possessive system of POC is exemplified by Bauan Fijian (Pawley 1973:169). Since Bauan also conforms to the system recon­ structed for PEO (see, for example, 2.4), I will assume that the analysis of PEO possessive constructions with non-pronominal possessors presented in this paper is also applicable to Poe. 2.0 Oceanic Possessives The Oceanic languages are well-known for their complex systems of possession. According to Pawley (1972, 1973), at least three possessive constructions must be reconstructed for both PEO and POC. These construc­ tions are distinguished both by the phonological shapes of their possessive particles, and by the order of constituents. The three possessive con­ structions are connnonly referred to as Inalienable, Edible, and Neutral. 2.1 A Noun Gender System Previously, scholars studying the Oceanic possessives attributed these three types of possessive constructions to a noun gender system. Each noun was assigned to one of three genders -- Inalienable, Edible, or Neutral -- and this gender assignment determined the possessive construc­ tion in which it could occur (see, for example, Codrington 1885:129). However, recent research suggests that it is the relationship be­ tween the head noun and the possessor which determines the type of - 1 - - 2 - possessive construction, rather than an inherent noun gender (see Buse 1960; Lynch 1973; Pawley 1973). Thus, a single noun may function as head in more than one construction type, depending upon the context in which it occurs. For example, Fijian dalo 'taro', will be possessed Edibly if it is intended for consumption; if not, it will be Neutrally possessed. (1) Fijian: na no-na dalo Art Boss-his taro 'his taro' Neutral (2) na ke-na dalo Art Poss-his taro 'his taro' Edible (Lynch 1973:76) In these Fijian examples, dalo is possessed either Edibly or Neutrally. Both Edible and Neutral co~uctions can be classed together as Alienable (vs. Inalienable) due to their common syntactic behaviour when utilized - with pronominal possessors (see 2.4). However, a single noun may be possessed both Alienably and Inalienably, as is demonstrated by the follow­ ing examples from Aroma: (3) Aroma: gage-ku leg-my 'my leg' Inalienable (4) ga-ku gage Poss-my leg 'my leg (e.g., of chicken) to eat' Alienable (Lynch 1973:78) In (3), ~· as a body part of the possessor, is possessed Inalienably. In (4), ~-refers to the body part of some unspecified animal, which the possessor intends to eat; it is therefore Edibly possessed. The fact that a single noun can be possessed1 in more than one type of construction indicates that it is not inherent noun gender which deter­ mines the particular construction utilized, but rather that the construc­ tion is determined by the relationship which exists between the head noun and the possessor:2 Different types of possessive constructions are thus seen as a classification of relationships and not of nouns (Lynch 1973:76). 2.2 Head Noun-Possessor Relationship The three types of possessive constructions in PEO/POC, correspond­ ing to the three kinds of relationships which may exist between head noun and possessor are Inalienable, Edible and Neutral.3 The Inalienable construction is used to indicate a 'natural part of a whole' (e.g., body parts), kin relations, and relational positions (be­ hind', 'in front of', etc.). The Edible construction generally indicates that the head noun is intended for consumption; there are some exceptions, 1ii11ii11ii11ii11ii11iii11ii11ii11ii11ii11ii11ii11iilliiii11iililiilililiiiiililililiiiliiiiiilliiilllllllllllllllllilllllllllDllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll-lllHl8llllhllDIHfl.. Hllll• - 3 - however, which will not be discussed in this paper (see Pawley 1973:162). The Neutral construction is more difficult to define; here, it will be defined negatively, in the sense that it includes relationships which are neither Inalienable nor Edible. 2.3 Possessive Particles All Oceanic possessive constructions include a possessive particle (herein glossed as Poss) which serves to distinguish the three types of constructions. In Pawley's reconstructions of PEO possessives, these particles also vary according to the type of possessor present in the construction, whether pronominal or non-pronominal. POC oossessive parti­ cles utilized with non-pronominal possessoi:s were not included in Pawley's 1973 reconstruction; however,,the POC particles used with pronominal possessors are included in the following chart: Personal Pronominal Name Inanimate ::::;::Relationshi POC I PEO PEO PEO Inalienable *r/J *qi Edible *ka *ki *ni Neutral *na I *no *ki Figu:i:e 1 Pawley's Reconstruction of PEO/POC Possessive Particles Human possessors which are non-pronominal and non-personal name have been omitted from the chart. They were not discussed in detail in Pawley's POC reconstruction. In his reconstruction of PEO, Pawley noted that human possessors were apparently utilized in either personal name­ type or pronominal-type possessive constructions, 4 although in the former, Poss *ni may have been obligatory (Pawley 1972:35). Because of this un­ certainty, they will not be examined as a separate category here, • 2.4 Possessor The type of possessor affects the possessive construction in two ways: (a) the shape of the possessive particle (see Fig. 1) (b) the order of constituents In all the PEO constructions involving personal name and inanimate possessors, and in Inalienable constructions with pronominal possessors, the order of constituents is as follows: ART HN POSS PSR - 4 - where: ART = Article HN = Head Noun POSS = Possessive Particle PSR = Possessor For example: Inalienable construction with pronominal possessor: (5) PEO: *na tama-'6-mu Art father-Poss-your 'your sg. father' (Pawley 1972: 34) (6) Lotora: na limwa-,S-ku Art arm-Poss-my 'my arm' (Ivens 1939:684) Inalienable construction with personal name possessor: (7) PEO: *na tama qi x • Art father Poss X 'X's father' (Pawley 1972:34) (8) Bauan: na liga i Lui Art hand Poss Lui 'Lui's hand' (PEO *qi > Bauan i) (Pawley and Sayaba 1971:421) Neutral construction with personal name possessor: (9) PEO: *na kiRa ni X Art adze Poss X 'X's adze' (Pawley 1972:34) Inanimate possessor: (10) PEO: *na ndau ni kayu Art leaf Poss tree 'tree leaf' (Pawley 1972:34) When the construction is Alienable, i.e., Edible or Neutral, and the possessor is pronominal, there is a different order of constituents. In this case, both POSS and PSR precede the head noun: ART POSS PSR HN For example: Edible construction with pronominal possessor: (11) PEO: *na ka-mu qupi Art Poss-your yam 'your sg. yam' (Pawley 1972:34) (12) Roviana: ge-ku ika Poss-my fish 'my fish' (PEO *ka > Rov. ~) (Pawley 1973:161) Neutral construction with pronominal possessor: (13) PEO: *na no-oku waoka Art Poss-my canoe 'my canoe' (Pawley 1972:34) (14) Bauan na no-qu vale Art Poss-my house 'my house' (Pawley and Sayaba 1971:422) - 5 - 2.5 The PEO possessive constructions can thus be sununarized as follows: Personal Pronominal Inanimate Name ~p Inalienable (ART) HN *r/J PSR ART HN *qi PSR Edible ART *ka PSR HN ART HN *ki PSR ART HN *ni PSR Neutral ART *no PSR HN ART HN *ni PSR Fig. 2 Pawley's Reconstruction of PEO Possessives The only difference between the constructions presented here and those present in POC is that, in POC, the possessive particle used in Neutral constructions with pronominal possessors is *na rather than *no (Pawley 1973:158). - - The complexities of the Oceanic possessive system are readily ap­ parent from this chart. First, the possessive particles have different shapes, according to both the type of construction, i.e., the relation­ ship between the head noun and the possessor, and the type of possessor present, i.e., pronominal or non-pronominal. Secondly, the order of con­ stituents also varies, with one constituent order being utilized in Alienable constructions with pronominal possessors (illustrated in Fig. 2 with double lines),