Re: The 'have' of possession

On 30.04.2024 16:57, Christian Weisgerber wrote:

On 2024-04-30, Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org.invalid> wrote:
 

This bothers me. What should (most) Celtic languages and (some) Slavic
languages share a feature that is not found in the many languages that
sit geographically between them?

 Ross has already pointed to the World Atlas of Language Structures:
 "As the map demonstrates, the distribution of the various types of
predicative possession shows considerable areal effects. Eurasia
and North Africa (with the exception of the languages of western
Europe) is almost exclusively the domain of the Oblique Possessive."

[snip]

Somewhere I've also read the suggestion that Russian might have
been influenced by Finnic languages.

E. g. in Hungarian (Magyar) there ain't a word for "have" either.
Instead, some kind of wording {[to whom] + [to be]} is in use.
In most cases even without that pronoun meaning [to whom],
since the term for the possessed <item> always has itself
an _ending_, a suffix, to it which itself bears the possessive
semantic.
E.g.
►  "(Nekem) Türelmem van" <or> "Van (nekem) türelmem" (I've got
patience.)
►  "(Nekem) Pénzem volt/lesz" <or> "Volt/lesz (majd) (nekem) pénzem"
(I had & I'll have money.)
►  "(Nekem,) Ha pénzem lenne/volna" <or> "Ha lenne/volna pénzem
(nekem)" (If I had money.) and "lett volna <or> volt volna"
(If I would have had)
A bit complicated is the rendering of "the haves and the have-nots":
=> e.g. wordings meaning "the proprietors/owners and the lack-all"
or "the penniless". (Even Latin can't show a good rendering by
means of "habere": "the haves" are the ... "possidentes". (As
in "beati possidentes," the "beautiful haves" :-)).
Tim