Hello all (and Emily in particular),
Now that I’m using preexisting phrase types for possessive phrases, I need a way to make sure that 1) a marked possessor never appears without its possessum, and 2) a marked possessum never appears without its possessor.
I’ve got some ideas for #2, but in order to accomplish #1, Emily proposed using CASE in a slightly novel way. I’m going to outline that approach here with the goal of making sure I’ve understood it fully before I implement it:
- In languages that have case, rather than having all cases inherit directly from case, have them inherit from some intermediate type (something like ‘real-case’) that contrasts with something like ‘poss-case.’
- Then give all marked possessors the value [ CASE poss-case ], which is incompatible with all other ‘real’ cases.
- In languages that have case, all verbal arguments will already have a required ‘real’ case value, so possessors will not show up as verbal arguments without their possessum. (This is the part I’m least sure on. Does some extra work have to be done here?)
Emily: Am I getting this right?
Everyone else: Do you see any ways to improve this approach or extend it to work for #2 as well as #1?