Typological study of possessive construction in Genavehei

Introduction
There have always been concepts of possession, possessee, possessor and so on in human life which are part of every culture’s language. The relationship between possessor and possessee is a universal concept that is abstract and can be realized and perceived by all language users. Our survey focused on possessive construction in the Genavehei variety according to Croft (2003) before determining whether it is alienable or inalienable based on Lichtenberg (2005). Genavehei is a variety that has not been widely researched. This port is 156 Km away from Boushehr and is located in the northern part of the Persian Gulf.
 
Matrials and Methods
Sharifi (2009) studied possessive construction based on Croft (2003). She believes that the main strategy employed in Farsi is Linker and the Persian language rank is somewhere between Compound and Agglutinative languages. Therefore, the main sentence construction of possession in Persian is possesses- possessor. Sharifi and Sabouri (2019) studied possessive strategies based on Croft (2003) in Gilaki, Semnani, Lori, Bakhtiari kohrange, Balouchi, Horami and Kurdi Jafi’s dialects.
This survey is data- based and has used content analysis. The study group consisted of 10 women and 11 men between the ages of 30 and 60. Among the participants 5 women and 5 men were talking Sarkhouri and 5 women and 6 men were talking Southern Luri. Two types of data were gathered: 1) the native speakers were asked to narrate their personal memory. 2) The native speakers were required to use possessive expressions. Ultimately, the recorded voices were analyzed based on Croft (2003) and Lichtenberg (2005) framework. The purpose of current study is to find appropriate answers to two questions: First, What is the typological rank of possessive construction according to Croft (2003) framework? Second, does this variety benefit from the distinction between alienable or inalienable?
 
Results & Discussion
The strategy of possessive construction in words which end in a consonant in Southern Lori is juxtaposition and in Sarkhouri is concatenation as well as the word order is possesses – possessor. If the possesses end in vowel, based on the vowel, in both varieties we face with four categories. 1) The combination which in both varieties end in /h/ phoneme. In any case, the /h/ phoneme is deleted from the end of possesses and /y/ is replaced. As a result, possesses and possessor stay next to each other without any linkers. About the words which end in /ah/, both /a/ and /h/ phoneme are deleted and /y/ is replaced. As mentioned in previous case, both possesses and possessor use juxtaposition strategy and without any linker next to each other. 2) When those words with the last sound of /a/ are combined, they turn into one of the combined sounds /aɪ/, /eɪ/ and /oɪ/ while in normal cases, they end in /a/ sound. In this situation, there is no linker anymore and the word order of possesse- possessor comes from juxtaposition. 3) Those words which end in /o/ or /ou/ sounds, in Southern Lori benefit from juxtaposition strategy however, in Sarkhouri these combinations attached to each other by a mediator phoneme /y/. 4) The word order in Southern Lori for words which end in /æ/ and /eɪ/ vowels, is possesses- possessor and they benefit from juxtaposition while in the other varieties both possesses and possessor are attached by a linker. In these two varieties, there are no specific morphological differences at the end of possesses.
In both varieties, “mal” is also used in two different meanings. The first one is exactly the same as Persian language the second one is about an area or neighborhood that is owned by someone. In this case, none of the varieties use linkers. Furthermore, both varieties use affixation. Possesses can be added to possessor by conjunctive pronoun as well as disjunctive pronoun. In both situations the word order is possesses- possessor.
With regards to the two concepts of alienable and inalienable, it should be said that in both varieties we can have alienable possessive constructions and inalienable possessive constructions. According to Lichtenberg (2005), there is no alternation between possessive structure in being alienable or inalienable.
 
Conclusion
The strategy of possessive construction in words which end in consonant in Southern Lori is juxtaposition and in Sarkhouri is concatenation as well as the word order is possesses – possessor. If the possesses end in vowel, based on the vowel, in both varieties we face with 4 categories. 1) The combination which in both varieties end in /h/ and /ah/ phoneme. In any case, the /h/ phoneme and /ah/ phoneme are deleted from the end of possesses and /y/ is replaced. As a result, possesses and possessor stay next to each other without any linkers. 2) Those words whose final sound is /a/, when they come in a combination, they change into one of the compund sounds /aɪ/, /eɪ/ and /oɪ/. In this situation the word order of possesses- possessor comes from juxtaposition. . 3) Those words which end in /o/ or /ou/ sounds, in Southern Lori benefit from juxtaposition strategy however, in Sarkhouri these combinations are attached to each other by a mediator phoneme /y/. 4) The word order in Southern Lori for words which end in /æ/ and /eɪ/ vowels, is possesses- possessor and they benefit from juxtaposition and in Sarkhouri both possesses and possessor are attached by a linker. Finally, it can be concluded that in both varieties we can have alienable possessive constructions and inalienable possessive constructions. According to Lichtenberg (2005), there is no alternation between possessive structure in being alienable or inalienable.