Непосессивные функции показателя посессивности третьего лица в малокарачкинском говоре чувашского языка

The study's objectives are to know what kinds of personal pronoun used in the novel and know which personal pronoun has the highest distribution. This article focuses on the personal pronoun. Frank (1972: 19) states that personal pronouns are divided into five, namely subjective pronouns, objective pronouns, possessive pronouns, possessive adjective pronouns, and reflexive pronouns. The function of a personal pronoun is to identify or refer to someone or the gender of that person. In writing, this can help readers understand the storyline more easily, to whom it is pointing, and the gender of the person without needing to tell him. This research is qualitative research designed in a descriptive study. The source of data is from the novel by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, "Sherlock Holmes: The Sign of Four." The writer will analyze the use of the personal pronoun in the novel. It is found that the use of the personal pronoun in a novel is varies depending on the function.

Two types of pronominal elements may appear in Catalan nominal constructions: the possessive pronoun and the strong pronoun. These elements differ in distribution, syntactic behavior and denotative properties. This paper proposes that the alternation between possessive and strong pronouns in nominals is parallel to the alternation betweenpro and strong pronouns in clausal structures. The possessive in nominals and in clauses instantiate the Avoid Pronoun Principle, whose application affects feature specification in the referential grid of pronominal elements, and not the phonological content of pronouns, as has traditionally been assumed.

The purpose of this research was to find out the students' ability in applying Possessive pronoun in writing sentences and the problems encounter it. This mixed method study employs an explanatory design to reveals it. 53 students out of 105 students from1st semester EFL students from one reputable University in Pekanbaru, Indonesia, were invited to this study. These 53 students were selected using simple random sampling and enrolled for an essay test and interview to see the students' ability and explaining the problems. The data analysis using SPSS showed that the average score of students was 52.98. Meanwhile for the median is 48, the mode is 20. The score of Standard Deviation is 27.93, Variance is 780.25, and Range is 84. Z-Score was found 41.5%, which is means higher than average and 58.5% while, students' ability was indicated below the average. It showed that the students were low ability in applying possessive pronoun in writing sentences. The study also found the common problems, i.e., (1) students still mixed up between possessive pronoun and possessive adjectives. (2) students used the wrong pattern in using a possessive pronoun. (3) students did not understand clearly about a possessive pronoun, (4) experiencing difficulties in learning possessive pronoun.

The pupils at a rural school were struggling to master the usage of Possessive Adjective and Possessive Pronoun .This action research was done to improve the usage of the Possessive adjective (PA) and Possessive pronoun (PP) among the pupils of a rural school with the use of the sing along song. This action research involved 16 year 4 low proficiency pupils of a rural school. The data was collected by using the test score of their pretest,post test and structured interview.This action research adopt the Kemmis and Mctaggart cyclic process.The finding shows that the sing along song helped in improving the usage of Possessive Adjective and Possessive Pronoun among the pupils.The pupils retain the improvement in their ability to identify and differentiate each types of the pronouns when the pupil’s score increase in their post test and also in their score for the second interview.

Proper noun genitives and possessive pronouns occur more frequently in postnominal position than common noun genitives in Beowulf and in many Old English (OE) verse texts. This is the opposite of patterns seen in most OE prose texts; however, the word order variation in this text correlates with such linguistic factors as animacy and morphosyntactic weight. Postnominal position is most common for proper noun genitives and possessive pronouns when both the possessive element and the head noun are animate. With inanimate heads, prenominal proper noun genitives and possessive pronouns are preferred. These findings are consistent with predictions made by the animacy hierarchy that more animate nouns should precede less animate nouns, with more variation possible in the case that both nouns are animate. For noun phrases (NPs) with common noun genitives, both animate genitives and compound head nouns result in higher frequencies of postnominal genitive position. Metrical and alliterative considerations are further shown to have an impact on possessive position within NPs; however, these poetic factors alone do not account for all of the word order variation. Language change related to the role of animacy in adnominal genitive position is argued as a contributing factor in this variation, given the elevated levels of postnominal proper noun genitives and possessive pronouns relative to postnominal common noun genitives across OE verse, as well as higher levels of postnominal proper noun genitives in certain early OE prose texts, and finally similarities in adnominal genitive position in Beowulf and historical Germanic languages other than OE. As animacy of the possessor is widely held to correlate with prenominal genitive position from the OE period onward, these findings complicate that picture for the earliest OE.

Theoretically, stimuli can be related to the self as subject (“I”) or object (“ME”) of experience. This event-related brain potential (ERP) study investigated whether listening to personal and possessive pronouns elicits different modes of self-processing regarding time-course and neural sources. Going beyond previous research, first (1PP) and second person (2PP) pronouns were included to determine the specificity of self-processing. Participants listened passively to German pronouns while the electroencephalogram was recorded. Modulation of ERPs revealed a processing advantage for the 2PP personal pronoun “du” (“you”) already in early time windows. Regarding possessive pronouns, N1 amplitudes indicated increased attention orientation to the 1PP pronoun “mein” (“my”), whereas during later time windows, processing of 1PP and 2PP possessive pronouns did not differ but differed from the third person pronoun “sein” (“his”). ERP source imaging suggests that primary sensory brain regions (auditory cortex), the insula and cortical midline structures are differentially involved into these two processing modes. The results support the idea of distinct self-processing modes (“I” and “ME”) and confirm their dynamic nature. Moreover, they demonstrate that on a neural level neither “I” or “ME” are invariantly tied to the first person, in line with the hypothesis that self-processing is relational and context-dependent.

In this article, we trace the diachronic phases of so-called genitive-dative syncretism in Old Bulgarian, a phenomenon which marks the beginning of the process of disintegration of the Case system in the history of Bulgarian. We base our research on a corpus study (comprising the texts of Codex Marianus, Codex Zographensis and Codex Suprasliensis) and we show, after a careful examination of the available syntactic positions for the Genitive and the Dative, that the main reason for the Dative shift in Old Bulgarian was the so-called External Possessive construction (also known as dativus sympatheticus) which allowed the dative to be interpreted outside the noun phrase but with reference to an inalienable possessive element inside the noun phrase. We discuss each stage of the functional reanalysis leading to the establishment of noun phrase internal dative possessives, and in particular the role of the emerging clitic pronouns and their second position syntactic behaviour as a main trigger of genitive-dative syncretism.

Scottish Gaelic has been traditionally analysed as having a set of adpositions which inflect for person and number. For example, from do [t̪ə] ‘to’ we find forms such as dhomh [ɣɔ˜ː] ‘to me’, dhut [ɣuʰt̪] ‘to you’ and dha [ɣa] ‘to him’. Additionally, most of these prepositions also show morphological fusion with the definite article (e.g. dhan taigh [ɣənˈtʰɤj] ‘to the house’) and may optionally undergo univerbation with a possessive pronoun ( dom thaigh [t̪əmˈhɤj] ‘to my house’). Stewart & Joseph (2009) analysed the pronominal forms in isolation as a large set of oblique cases marked only in pronouns, rather than as inflected prepositions. In this article, I show how taking into account the morphological alternations in combination with the definite article and possessive pronouns, as well as highlighting functional parallels with the distribution of these forms to case inflections in other languages, suggests an extension of this descriptive analysis to nouns, with a paradigmatic-realisational approach being best-placed to account for the data. A key result of this analysis is that case markers and adpositions are placed on different tiers of description, with Scottish Gaelic using prepositions in the realisation of a large paradigm of local cases. The effects of this large expansion of the local case system upon the historical development of Scottish Gaelic are discussed, including the implications this has for discussions around grammaticalization.

I. Papers Empty-domain Effects for Presuppositional and Non-presuppositional Determiners, D. Abush, M. Rooth From Discourse Macro-Structure to Micro-Structure and Back Again: Discourse Semantics and the Focus/Background Distinction, N. Asher Fixing the Reference Situations: German Temporal Conjunctions, R. Bauerle Accommodating Topics, D. Beaver On Context and Identity, P. Dekker Are Context Change Potentials Functions?, T. Fernando A Minimal Theory of Adverbial Quantification, Kai von Fintel Focus and the Boundaries of the Language System, E. Hajicova Focus and/or Context: A Second Look at Second Occurrence Expressions, M. Krifka Topic, Focus, and Some Aspects of the Semantics of Discourse, P. Kubon Why not Kim Basinger? On the Art des Gegebenseins of a Contextually Given Set, A. Merin Order-Independence and Underspecification, R. Muskens Dynamic Semantics with Choice Functions, J. Peregrin, K. von Heusinger Topics and the Conceptual Interface, T. Reinhart Presuppositions of Existence and of Uniqueness, and Allegation, P. Sgall Tertiumne Datur? Possessive Pronouns and the Bipartition of the Lexicon, T.E. Zimmermann II. Comments Comments on Tim Fernando: Mathematical Treatments of Contexts, N. Asher Comments on Manfred Krifka: Can Pragmatic Accounts Explain Pseudo-Secondary Effects of Focus?, N. Asher Comments on Asher and Krifka: Acoustic Correlates of Second Occurrence Focus: Toward and Experimental Investigation, C. Bartels Comments on Beavers and von Fintels Theories of Presuppostition Accommodation, S. Berman Comments on Zimmermann: Tertium Evitari Non Potest: On Ede Zimmermanns Bipartition of the Lexicon, M. Bierwisch Cases, Adverbs, Situations and Events, P. Dekker Comments on Beaver: Presupposition Accomodation and Quantifier Domains, Kai von Fintel Comments on Reinhart: The Syntactic Roots of Discourse Cohesion, Kai von Fintel Comments on von Fintel, E Hajicova Remarks on Focus Sensitive Particles (to Krifkas and von Fintels Papers), E. Hajicova, Petr Sgall Remarks on DRT and TFA, E. Hajicova, P. Sgall Comments on Kaplans Demonstratives and Zimmermanns Tertiumne Datur? Possessive Pronouns and the Bipartition of the Lexicon, H. Kamp, A. Robetadeutcher Comments on Dekker, J. Peregrin Comments on Krifka, J. Peregrin A Comment on Reinhard Muskens Paper: Order Independence and Underspecification, M. Pinkal Comments on Krifkas Paper, M. Rooth Topichood and the Stage/Individual Distinction, H. de Swart Negation: Scope and Anaphora, H. de Swart Topic, Focus, and Presupposition, H. de Swart Remarks on the Epistemic Role of Discourse Referents, T.E. Zimmermann III. Authors Replies Minimal Replies to: Dekker, Hajicova & Sgall, Berman and De Swart, K. von Fintel Replies to: Rooth, Bartels, Asher and Peregrin, M. Krifka Replies to: Bierwisch, Kamp & Robetadeutscher and Muskens, T.E. Zimmermann

In the Orthodox Church at Easter, the Prologue of the Gospel of John is read in different languages. In the Russian Orthodox Church ten languages are used, including Old Greek, German, English, Church Slavonic and Russian. The observed variations in readings are thematically associated with the grammatical principles of language structure. The present work analyzes the difference in the use of personal and possessive pronouns, substitutes for personal and possessive pronouns. As well as masculine and neuter adjective and verb endings in the Russian translation. The results contribute to a better understanding of the theological meaning of the texts. The studies of Bible translations are important because the language of the Holy Scriptures is something special, often it sounds like a hymn. The Prologue of John's Gospel is regarded as a hymn of the apostolic church characterized by inner harmony on multiple levels. There are three types of translations: those based on the original language, those where the target language is in the foreground, or those for specific readers and target groups. There are particular difficulties in translating the Greek word "κατέλαβεν", which has multiple meanings - “to understand” and “to master”. The translation of the Easter Gospel into German and English reflects the complex semantics of this word, while the translation of this word into Russian and Church Slavonic cannot give the full meaning of the original text. Various translation possibilities are being discussed in order to better match the sound and meaning of the original text. The article further proposes that these issues be presented before the Synodal Biblical and Theological Commission for further consideration.

Slovensko brdo Pohorje je sicer zaključena zemljepisna enota, s stališča jezika pa ni enotno, ampak se deli na tri narečja; v prispevku skušam odgovoriti na vprašanje, kako se ta neenotnost kaže v razporejenosti terenskih izrazov (vrh, gora, brdo, hrib, kogel, breg) v zemljepisnih lastnih imenih. V nadaljevanju je prikazana razširjenost zemljepisnih imen z osnovo brdo na vsem slovenskem jezikovnem prostoru.

Cogito, Possessive Individualism, subjectification―Individual and Individualism in Western Modernity―

Possessives

The current study examines the relationship of gender, relationship status, relationship satisfaction, love and self-esteem with romantic jealousy. The sample includes 189 participants (Females = 122; Males = 67). Of these, 114 participants were in a dating relationship while 75 were married. Participants filled out an online form comprising of three scales: Multidimensional Jealousy Scale (Pffiefer & Wong, 1989); Sternberg Triangular Love Scale (Sternberg, 1988); Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 1965). Relationship Satisfaction was assessed using a single item adapted from ‘Satisfaction Level Facet and Global Items’ (Rusbult, Martz & Agnew, 1998). Subsequently, interviews were held with 10 participants (5 married, 5 dating), who scored the highest score on jealousy. Data was analysed using t tests and correlations. No significant gender differences in terms of jealousy are found. Participants in dating relationships were higher on overall jealousy, cognitive jealousy and behavioural jealousy, than married individuals. Correlational analysis shows significant negative associations of relationship satisfaction with overall and cognitive jealousy. Love is negatively correlated with cognitive jealousy. Emotional jealousy and love have a significant positive link. Self-esteem is negatively associated with all dimensions of jealousy. Further, four themes emerge after qualitative analysis of interviews with: Origin of jealousy; Social media; Reactive, anxious and possessive jealousy; Role of relationship rewards.

Possessives