Editing Inalienable possession (section)

==Cross-linguistic properties==
Although there are different methods of marking inalienability, inalienable possession constructions usually involve the following features:<ref name=Heine2/>

* The distinction is confined to attributive possession.
* Alienable possession requires more [[phonological]] or [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] features than inalienable possession.
*Inalienable possession involves a tighter structural bond between the possessor and the possessee.
* Possessive markers on inalienable nouns are [[etymologically]] older{{efn|For example, in the [[Native American language]] [[Kumeyaay people#Language|Diegueño]], the alienable possessive marker ('''''?-ə'''n<sup>y</sup>'') appears to have originated from the inalienable possessive marker ('''''?-ə'''''), which suggests the latter to be older.<ref name="space and time">{{cite book|last1=Nichols|first1=Johanna|title=Linguistic Diversity in Space and Time|date=1992|publisher=University of Chicago Press|location=Chicago|pages=116–123|edition=ACLS Humanities E-Book}}</ref>}}
* Inalienable nouns include kinship terms and/or body parts.
* Inalienable nouns form a [[closed class]], but alienable nouns form an [[open class (linguistics)|open class]]. 
(Heine 1997: 85-86 (1-6))

===Restricted to attributive possession===
[[File:Attributive possession DP.jpg|thumb|170px|Attribution possession: the possessor (Ron) and the possessee (dog) form a [[phrase]].]]
 [[File:Predicative possession 1.jpg|thumb|right|170px|Predicative possession: the possessor (Ron) and the possessee (dog) form not a phrase but instead a [[clause]].]]
Alienability can be expressed only in attributive possession constructions, not in predicative possession.<ref name=Heine2/>

Attributive possession is a type of possession in which the possessor and possessee form a [[phrase]]. That contrasts to predicative possession constructions in which the possessor and possessee are part of a [[clause]], and the verb affirms the possessive relationship.<ref name="Herslund and Baron">{{cite book|last1=Herslund|first1=Michael|last2=Baron|first2=Irène|title=Dimensions of Possession|date=2001|publisher=John Benjamins Publishing|location=Amsterdam|isbn=978-9027229519|pages=1–15|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lcCKtWG3wsAC&q=Dimensions+of+Possession&pg=PA1|access-date=11 December 2014}}</ref> The examples in (22) express the same alienable relationship between possessor and possessee but illustrate the difference between attributive and predicative possession:

{|
|-
|
 '''Attributive possession'''
 (22) a. Ron's dog
 
 '''Predicative possession'''
      b. Ron has a dog
      c. The dog is Ron's
         (Heine 1997: 87 (2))
|}

===Requires fewer morphological features===
If a language has separate alienable and inalienable possession constructions, and one of the constructions is overtly marked and the other is "zero-marked", the marked form tends to be alienable possession. Inalienable possession is indicated by the absence of the overt marker.<ref name=Haspelmath>{{cite web|last1=Haspelmath|first1=Martin|title=Alienable vs. inalienable possessive constructions|url=http://www.eva.mpg.de/lingua/conference/08_springschool/pdf/course_materials/Haspelmath_Possessives.pdf|website=Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology|publisher=Leipzig Spring School on Linguistic Diversity|access-date=9 November 2014}}</ref> An example is the [[Inalienable possession#No overt possessive markers|data from Dâw]].

One typological study showed that in 78% of South American languages that distinguish between inalienable and alienable possession, inalienable possession was associated with fewer [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] markers than was its alienable counterpart. By contrast, only one of the surveyed languages required more [[morphology (linguistics)|morphological]] features to mark inalienable possession than alienable possession.<ref name="auto1"/> If a language makes a grammatical distinction between alienable and inalienable nouns, having an overt possessive marker to mark inalienability is redundant. After all, by being inalienable, a noun must be possessed.

===Tighter structural bond between possessor and possessee===
In inalienable possession constructions, the relationship between the possessor and possessee is stronger than in alienable possession constructions. [[Johanna Nichols]] characterizes that by the tendency of inalienable possession to be [[head-marking language|head-marked]] but alienable possession to be [[dependent-marking language|dependent-marked]].<ref name="space and time"/> In head-marking, the [[head (linguistics)|head]] of an inalienable possession construction (the possessed noun) is marked, but in dependent-marking, the dependent (the possessor noun) is marked.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Matthews|first1=P. H.|title=Head marking|publisher=Oxford University Press|doi=10.1093/acref/9780199202720.001.0001|year=2007|isbn=9780199202720}}</ref>