[Mova](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/rosenbach-2017-constraints-contact-animacy-english-afrikaans/)

[home](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [docs](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/) / [papers](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/) / [English](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/en/) / Constraints in contact: Animacy in English and Afrikaans genitive variation – a cross-linguistic perspective

# Constraints in contact: Animacy in English and Afrikaans genitive variation – a cross-linguistic perspective

**Authors:** Anette Rosenbach · **Year:** 2017 · **Venue:** Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 2(1) **Link:** [glossa-journal.org/article/id/4934](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/4934/) (DOI [10.5334/gjgl.292](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292)) · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

[**14** citations](https://openalex.org/works?filter=cites:W2744656790) openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14[**1** citations in our library](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/cited-by/rosenbach-2017-constraints-contact-animacy-english-afrikaans/) of the 140673 papers whose bibliographies we read[Glossa: a journal of general linguistics](https://openalex.org/S4210226983)[licence](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

- [Publisher's page](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292)
- [PDF](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/4934/galley/12386/download)
- [DOI 10.5334/gjgl.292](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292)
- [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2744656790)

**Authors (1)**

1. [Rosenbach, Anette](https://openalex.org/A5054577225) [ORCID](https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9367-214X) · h 20 · 2108 citations · 38 works

Citations and author metrics from openalex-snapshot (2026-10-14); authors with the same name are not always told apart.

## What it is about

English has two possessive constructions: the s-genitive (*the dog's tail*) and the of-genitive (*the roof of the car*). Animate possessors take the s-genitive more often, an animacy split that the paper places in a wider typology of possession splits. Afrikaans has a similar split with the prenominal *se*-genitive, but the paper shows that Afrikaans uses *se* more freely with inanimate possessors. A corpus of 1,386 genitive tokens from a parallel Afrikaans-English novel pair (an original and its translation) gives 28.3% *se* with inanimate possessors against 12% s-genitive in English. A forced-choice experiment with 130 speakers, on 11 passages with inanimate definite possessors, gives 26.4% s-genitive for White South African English, 30.2% for British English and 37.4% for Afrikaans-first speakers of English. The author concludes that the Afrikaans constraint carries over to the second-language English of Afrikaans speakers, and that the regional English result is not clear evidence of contact.

## Ideas

- I1. An animacy-based choice rule for the English genitive in `en/src/lin.rs` or the generator: a possessor with the animate feature takes the s-genitive, an inanimate one takes of, and the choice is logged with the feature that decided it. Keep the animacy values in the lexicon as an enum, not as strings.
- I2. Variety weights as a table: for each English variety, a weight for the inanimate s-genitive (for example British 30%, South African 26%, Afrikaans-first L2 37%, as reported in the paper). The generator picks variants by weight, using a fixed seed so runs are identical.
- I3. Negative control: shuffle the animacy labels across possessors. The rule's agreement with corpus choices must fall, otherwise the feature is not doing the work.
- I4. Parallel-text check: align a Mova English text with its translation into another language and count which genitive form the translator chose; use the paired counts as a test set, not as training data.

## For Mova

The chapters are [11. Nouns](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en/11-nouns/) (the possessive 's and the genitive), [22. Phrases: noun, adjective, adverb and prepositional phrases](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en/22-phrases/) (noun phrase internal order and modifiers) and [08. National varieties](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en/08-national-varieties/) (the South African and other varieties). The code is `en/src/lin.rs` (linearisation of the possessor) and `en/src/dict.rs` (animacy in the lexicon). The measures: agreement of the animacy rule with the paper's English figures (British 30.2%, South African 26.4% for inanimate s-genitives), run twice for determinism, and the shuffled-label negative control. The paper's parallel corpus is small (two novels), so Mova should use its own English counts for any evaluation.

## Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. [DOI 10.5334/gjgl.292](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292)

```
@article{rosenbach2017constraints,
  title = {{Constraints in contact: Animacy in English and Afrikaans genitive variation – a cross-linguistic perspective}},
  author = {Rosenbach, Anette},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2017},
  doi = {10.5334/gjgl.292},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292}
}
```

- [← previous Developing a Corpus of Indirect Speech Act Schemas](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/roque-2020-developing-corpus-indirect-speech-act/)
- [next → How well do NLI models capture verb veridicality?](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/ross-2019-how-well-do-nli-models/)
- [↑ back to English](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/en/)

## References

46 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Aijmer, Karin & Bengt Altenberg (eds.). 2013. Studies in corpus linguistics: Advances in corpus-based contrastive linguistics: Studies in Honour of Stig Johansson. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.54 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.54)
2. Aissen, Judith. 1999. Markedness and subject choice in Optimality Theory. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 20(1). 81–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014222605182 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014222605182)
3. Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 435–483. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024109008573 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024109008573)
4. Aissen, Judith & Joan Bresnan. 2002. Optimality theory and typology. Course taught at the DGfS/LSA summer school Formal and functional linguistics, Heinrich-Heine University Düsseldorf, 14 July – 3 August 2002. Course material online: www.phil-fak.uniduesseldorf.de/summerschool2002/CDV/CDAissen.htm. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Aissen%2C+Judith+%26+Joan+Bresnan%2E+2002%2E+Optimality+theory+and+typology%2E+Course+taught+at+the+DGfS%2FLSA+summer+school+Formal+and+functional+linguistics%2C+Heinrich%2DHeine+University+D%C3%BCsseldorf%2C+14+July+%E2%80%93+3+Au)
5. Bowerman, Sean. 2004. White South African English: Phonology. In Rajend Mesthrie (ed.), Varieties of English 4: Africa, South and Southeast Asia, 164–176. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bowerman%2C+Sean%2E+2004%2E+White+South+African+English%3A+Phonology%2E+In+Rajend+Mesthrie+%28ed%2E%29%2C+Varieties+of+English+4%3A+Africa%2C+South+and+Southeast+Asia%2C+164%E2%80%93176%2E+Berlin%2FNew+York%3A+Mouton+de+Gruyter%2E)
6. Bresnan, Joan, Anette Rosenbach, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi, Sali A. Tagliamonte & Simon Todd. 2017. Syntactic alternations data: Datives and genitives in four varieties of English. Stanford Digital Repository. Available at: [http://purl.stanford.edu/qj187zs3852](http://purl.stanford.edu/qj187zs3852). [↗](http://purl.stanford.edu/qj187zs3852)
7. Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & Harald Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In Gerloff Bouma, Irene Kraemer & Joost Zwarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Science. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bresnan%2C+Joan%2C+Anna+Cueni%2C+Tatiana+Nikitina+%26+Harald+Baayen%2E+2007%2E+Predicting+the+dative+alternation%2E+In+Gerloff+Bouma%2C+Irene+Kraemer+%26+Joost+Zwarts+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Cognitive+foundations+of+interpretation%2C+69)
8. Bresnan, Joan & Marilyn Ford. 2010. Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language 86(1). 168–213. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0189 Bresnan, Joan, Shipra Dingare & Christopher D. Manning. 2001. Soft constraints mirror hard constraints: Voice and person in English and Lummi. In Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, 13–32. Stanford: CSLI Publications. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0189)
9. Deumert, Ana. 2004. Language standardization and language change. The dynamics of Cape Dutch. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.19 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.19)
10. Donaldson, Bruce. 1991. The influence of English on Afrikaans. 2 nd edition; Pretoria: Academica. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Donaldson%2C+Bruce%2E+1991%2E+The+influence+of+English+on+Afrikaans%2E+2+nd+edition%3B+Pretoria%3A+Academica%2E)
11. Donaldson, Bruce. 1993. A grammar of Afrikaans. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863154 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110863154)
12. Evans, Nicholas & Stephen C. Levinson. 2009. The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32. 429–448. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999094X [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x0999094x)
13. Grafmiller, Jason. 2014. Variation in English genitives across modality and genres. English Language and Linguistics 18(3). 471–496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1 360674314000136 Heine, Bernd & Tania Kuteva. 2005. Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511614132 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/S1)
14. Heller, Benedikt, Benedikt Szmrecsanyi & Jason Grafmiller. 2017. Stability and fluidity in syntactic variation world-wide: The genitive alternation across varieties of English. Journal of English Linguistics 45(1). 3–27. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1177/0075424216685405 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424216685405)
15. Hinrichs, Lars & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2007. Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: A multivariate analysis of tagged corpora. English Language and Linguistics 11(3). 437–474. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1360674307002341 Hundt, Marianne. 1998. New Zealand English grammar. Fact or fiction. A corpus-based study in morphosyntactic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ veaw.g23 Hundt, Marianne & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2012. Animacy in early New Zealand English. English World-Wide 33. 241–263. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.3.01hun [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.3.01hun)
16. Jahr Sorheim, Mette-Catherine. 1980. The s-genitive in Present-day English. Oslo: Department of English, University of Oslo Thesis. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jahr+Sorheim%2C+Mette%2DCatherine%2E+1980%2E+The+s%2Dgenitive+in+Present%2Dday+English%2E+Oslo%3A+Department+of+English%2C+University+of+Oslo+Thesis%2E)
17. Jankowski, Bridget & Sali Tagliamonte. 2014. On the genitive’s trail: Data and method from a sociolinguistic perspective. English Language and Linguistics 18(2). 305–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674314000045 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674314000045)
18. Jeffery, Chris & Bertus van Rooy. 2004. Emphasiser now in colloquial South African English. World Englishes 23. 269–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919. 2003.00351.x Johansson, Stig. 2007. Seeing through multilingual corpora: On the use of corpora in contrastive studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.26 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0883-2919)
19. Kirsten, Johanita. 2016. Grammatikale verandering in Afrikaans 1911–2010 [Grammatical changes in Afrikaans 1911–2010]. Vanderbijlpark: North–West University, Africa dissertation. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kirsten%2C+Johanita%2E+2016%2E+Grammatikale+verandering+in+Afrikaans+1911%E2%80%932010+%5BGrammatical+changes+in+Afrikaans+1911%E2%80%932010%5D%2E+Vanderbijlpark%3A+North%E2%80%93West+University%2C+Africa+dissertation%2E)
20. Klein, Wolfgang & Clive Perdue. 1997. The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research 13. 301–347. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1191/026765897666879396 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1191/026765897666879396)
21. Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2004. Language contact and Spanish aspectual expression: A formal analysis. Lingua 114. 1291–1330. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua. 2003.07.008 Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria. 2001. Adnominal possession. In Martin Haspelmath, Ekkehard König, Wulf Oesterreicher & Wolfgang Raible (eds.), Language typology and language universals (Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science 20.1, 2) 2. 960–70. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua)
22. Koptjevskaja-Tamm, Maria. 2002. Adnominal possession in the European languages: Form and function. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 55. 141–172. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2002.55.2.141)
23. Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Labov%2C+William%2E+1972%2E+Sociolinguistic+patterns%2E+Philadelphia%3A+University+of+Philadelphia+Press%2E)
24. Lass, Roger. 2002. English in South Africa. In Rajend Mesthrie (ed.), Language in South Africa, 104–126. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lass%2C+Roger%2E+2002%2E+English+in+South+Africa%2E+In+Rajend+Mesthrie+%28ed%2E%29%2C+Language+in+South+Africa%2C+104%E2%80%93126%2E+Cambridge%3A+Cambridge+University+Press%2E)
25. Lass, Roger & Susan Wright. 1986. Endogeny vs contact: “Afrikaans influence” on South African English. English World-Wide 7. 201–223. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/eww. 7.2.03las MacDonald, Maryellen C. 2013. How language production shapes language form and Comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 1–16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg. 2013.00226 Mesthrie, Rajend. 2002. Endogeny versus contact revisited: Aspectual busy in South African English. Language Sciences 24(3–4). 345–358. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0388-0001(01)00037-7 Mesthrie, Rajend & Paula West. 1995. Towards a grammar of Proto-South African English. English World-Wide 16. 105–133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.16.1.05mes [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/eww)
26. O’Connor, Catherine, Joan Maling & Barbora Skarabela. 2013. Nominal categories and the expression of possession. In Kersti Börjars, David Denison & Alan Scott (eds.), Morphosyntactic categories and the expression of possession, 89–121. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.199.04oco [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/la.199.04oco)
27. Preston, Dennis R. 2004. Language with an attitude. In J.K. Chambers, Peter Trudgill and Natalie Schilling-Estes (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 40–66. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756591.ch2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756591.ch2)
28. Rosenbach, Anette. 2002. Genitive variation in English. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899818 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110899818)
29. Rosenbach, Anette. 2005. Animacy versus weight as determinants of genitive variation in English. Language 81(3). 613–644. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0149 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0149)
30. Rosenbach, Anette. 2007. Emerging variation: Determiner genitives and noun modifiers in English. English Language and Linguistics 11(1). 143–189. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1360674306002140 Rosenbach, Anette. 2008. Animacy and grammatical variation – findings from English genitive variation. Lingua 118. 151–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.002 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.002)
31. Rosenbach, Anette. 2010. How synchronic gradience makes sense in the light of language change (and vice versa). In Elizabeth C. Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 149–179. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.90.09ros)
32. Rosenbach, Anette. 2014. English genitive variation – the state of the art. English Language and Linguistics 18(2). 215–262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674314000021 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674314000021)
33. Roussow, Ronel & Bertus van Rooy. 2012. Diachronic changes in modality in South African English. English World-Wide, 1–26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.1.01ros [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/eww.33.1.01ros)
34. Schneider, Edgar W. 2007. Postcolonial English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511618901 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511618901)
35. Schneider, Edgar W. 2008. Clustering global Englishes automatically: Neutral input, meaningful results. In Hans-Georg Wolf, Lothar Peter & Frank Polzenhagen (eds.), Focus on English: Linguistic structure, language variation and discursive use. Studies in honour of Peter Lucko, 51–63. Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schneider%2C+Edgar+W%2E+2008%2E+Clustering+global+Englishes+automatically%3A+Neutral+input%2C+meaningful+results%2E+In+Hans%2DGeorg+Wolf%2C+Lothar+Peter+%26+Frank+Polzenhagen+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Focus+on+English%3A+Linguistic+struct)
36. Scholtz, J. du P. 1980. Wording en Ontwikkeling van Afrikaans [The origin and development of Afrikaans]. Cape Town: Tafelberg Publishers. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Scholtz%2C+J%2E+du+P%2E+1980%2E+Wording+en+Ontwikkeling+van+Afrikaans+%5BThe+origin+and+development+of+Afrikaans%5D%2E+Cape+Town%3A+Tafelberg+Publishers%2E)
37. Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1994. Language contact and language change: Spanish in Los Angeles. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Silva%2DCorval%C3%A1n%2C+Carmen%2E+1994%2E+Language+contact+and+language+change%3A+Spanish+in+Los+Angeles%2E+Oxford%3A+Oxford+University+Press%2E)
38. Stolz, Thomas, Sonja Kettler, Cornelia Stroh & Aina Urdze. 2008. Split possession. An areal-typological study of the alienability correlation and related phenomena in the languages of Europe. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.101 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.101)
39. Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Anette Rosenbach, Joan Bresnan & Christoph Wolk. 2014. Culturally conditioned language change? A multi-variate analysis of genitive constructions in ARCHER. In Marianne Hundt (ed.), Late Modern English syntax, 133–152. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Szmrecsanyi%2C+Benedikt%2C+Anette+Rosenbach%2C+Joan+Bresnan+%26+Christoph+Wolk%2E+2014%2E+Culturally+conditioned+language+change%3F+A+multi%2Dvariate+analysis+of+genitive+constructions+in+ARCHER%2E+In+Marianne+Hundt+%28e)
40. Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Douglas Biber, Jesse Egbert & Karlien Franco. 2016. Toward more accountability: Modeling ternary genitive variation in Late Modern English. Language Variation and Change 28. 1–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394515000198 Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Jason Grafmiller, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach, Sali Tagliamonte & Simon Todd. To appear. Spoken syntax in a comparative perspective: The dative and genitive alternation in native vernaculars of English. Glossa. Special Collection: Probabilistic grammars: Syntactic variation in a comparative perspective. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394515000198)
41. Trudgill, Peter. 2004. New dialect formation. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Trudgill%2C+Peter%2E+2004%2E+New+dialect+formation%2E+Edinburgh%3A+Edinburgh+University+Press%2E)
42. Wasserman, Ronel & Bertus van Rooy. 2014. The development of modals of obligation and necessity in White South African English through contact with Afrikaans. Journal of English Linguistics 42(1). 31–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424213514588 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424213514588)
43. Wolk, Christoph, Joan Bresnan, Anette Rosenbach & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2013. Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica 30(3). 382–419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ dia.30.3.04wol How to cite this article: Rosenbach, Anette. 2017. Constraints in contact: Animacy in English and Afrikaans genitive variation – a cross-linguistic perspective. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 2(1): 72. 1–22, DOI: https://doi. org/10.5334/gjgl.292 [↗](https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.292) [our card](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/rosenbach-2017-constraints-contact-animacy-english-afrikaans/)
44. Submitted: 08 November 2016 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Submitted%3A+08+November+2016)
45. Published: 04 August 2017 [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Published%3A+04+August+2017)
46. Copyright: © 2017 The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. See [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Glossa: a journal of general linguistics is a peer-reviewed open access journal published by Ubiquity Press. OPEN ACCESS [↗](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)