# All Slavic languages: omission of possessive pronouns



## Gavril

Do some Slavic languages omit possessive pronouns, so that only context can resolve who something belongs to? Here are some hypothetical examples:


"I told cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday."

"He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken."

"When he got home, he brushed teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed."

"He got in car [= his car] and drove away."


Which Slavic languages allow sentences like these?

Thanks


----------



## ilocas2

Czech:

"I told cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday."

Včera jsem *bratranci* řekl celou příhodu. - _without possesive pronoun._

"He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken."

Dneska nemůže hrát - má zlomenou *ruku. - *_without possesive pronoun, but it must be translated as "he has broken arm"._

"When he got home, he brushed teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed."

Když přišel domů, vyčistil *si zuby* a šel si lehnout. - _with reflexive pronoun in dative._

"He got in car [= his car] and drove away."

Nasedl do *auta* a odjel. - _without possesive pronoun._

Note: The sentences aren't exact translations, words are sometimes changed and word order is different for sounding as best as possible.


----------



## bibax

Necessary to stress that Czech always uses the reflexive personal pronoun *si* (= to myself, to himself, to ourselves, etc.) in such sentences like "I washed my hands" or "he brushed his teeth". The pronoun *si* is invariant (not dependent on the subject) as it always refers to the subject of the sentence. It cannot be omitted.

Umyl *si* ruce. = He (has) washed *his* hands.
Zlomil *si* ruku. = He broke (has broken) *his* arm.
Vyčistila *si* zuby. = She brushed *her* teeth.

The reflexive personal pronoun can be replaced by a non-reflexive personal pronoun if the object belongs to another person.

1. Petr *si* zlomil ruku. = Peter broke _his*_ arm. 
2. Petr *mu* zlomil ruku. = Peter broke _his*_ arm.

* In the first case Peter broke his own arm, while in the second case Peter broke another person's arm. The distinction of reflexive and non-reflexive pronouns is substantial.


----------



## Duya

I feel the question is wrong. Let me repeat the examples:

1) "I told *the *cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday."
2) "He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken."
3) "When he got home, he brushed *the *teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed."
4) "He got in *the* car [= his car] and drove away."

There is no "omission" of the possessive pronoun, because it was never required in the first place. Except in 2), possession of all the things mentioned is already known or implied from the context. In whose else car would he normally enter in 4? If it were somebody else's car, that should be stressed, but it is implied that the car is his own (or otherwise known).

What is "omitted" from those sentences is actually the definite article, which, as you know, most Slavic languages lack (except Bulgarian and Macedonian). 

Concerning sentence 2), I will argue that even in English (though, obviously, it is not my mother tongue) the arm requires some sort of qualifier. You would hardly say:

a) "He can't play today -- the arm is broken." 

It is grammatically correct, but it makes the listener somewhat puzzled about which arm is in question; the two sentences look disconnected. Instead, you would rather say:

b) "He can't play today -- *his* arm is broken." 

or use an active construction:

c) "He can't play today -- he broke *his* arm." 

At least in my mother tongue, the examples would almost exactly parallel English:

a) _Ne može danas da igra -- ruka je slomljena._  (passive)
b) _Ne može danas da igra -- ruka *mu* je slomljena._  (passive)
c) _Ne može danas da igra -- slomio je ruku._  (active)

Note that in c), we would rather omit the possessive (it is implied from the context, as above). In b), we would use possessive dative rather than possessive pronoun, but that's just syntactic sugar.


----------



## TriglavNationalPark

Slovenian:

1.) *Včeraj sem bratrancu povedal celo zgodbo. *(no possessive pronoun; possession implied)

2.) *Danes ne more igrati -- ima zlomljeno roko.* (no possessive pronoun; "he has a broken arm")

*Danes ne more igrati -- zlomil si je roko. *(*reflexive*; literally "he broke himself an arm")

You _must_ use the reflexive form in this case.

Also note that in Slovenian, you _cannot_ form this sentence as you would in Duya's Serbian example: 

*Danes ne more igrati -- roka mu je zlomljena.* 

3.) *Ko je prišel domov, si je umil zobe in šel spat / šel v posteljo.* (*reflexive*; literally "he washed himself the teeth")

4.) *Usedel se je v avto in se odpeljal. *(no possessive pronoun necessary)


----------



## Duya

TriglavNationalPark said:


> *Danes ne more igrati -- zlomil si je roko. *(*reflexive*; literally "he broke himself an arm")
> 
> You _must_ use the reflexive form in this case.
> 
> Also note that in Slovenian, you _cannot_ form this sentence as you would in Duya's Serbian example:
> 
> *Danes ne more igrati -- roka mu je zlomljena.*



And in turn, in standard Serbian you cannot use the reflexive form , because the reflexive pronoun "se" does not exist in dative ("si"):

*Danas ne može igrati -- slomio si je ruku. *

That is, however, frequent in colloquial Croatian (kajkavian influence?), and may even have found its way to the standard language. 

Technically, you could say "slomio je *svoju *ruku", but that sounds quite unnatural.


----------



## Orlin

Duya said:


> And in turn, in standard Serbian you cannot use the reflexive form , because the reflexive pronoun "se" does not exist in dative ("si"):
> 
> *Danas ne može igrati -- slomio si je ruku. *
> 
> That is, however, frequent in colloquial Croatian (kajkavian influence?), and may even have found its way to the standard language.
> 
> Technically, you could say "slomio je *svoju *ruku", but that sounds quite unnatural.


 
Možda na jugu Srbije pošto u bugarskom postoji dativna povratna zamenica "си"?

_Ne može danas da igra -- ruka *mu* je slomljena._  (passive)
Gotovo isto na bugarskom: Не може днес да играе - ръката *му* е счупена.
_Ne može danas da igra -- slomio je ruku._  (active)
Ima 2 varijante za prevod na bugarski:
1. Не може днес да играе - счупил е ръка.
2. Не може днес да играе - счупил *си* е ръката.


----------



## Duya

Orlin said:


> Možda na jugu Srbije pošto u bugarskom postoji dativna povratna zamenica "си"?



Da, koristi se i na jugu Srbije. Ne bih znao zašto je enklitika "si" nestala iz aktivne upotrebe u štokavskim govorima, a prognana je i iz standarda -- dobro je formirana i jezički ekonomična. Naravno, postoji dugi oblik "sebi" ali on nije primenljiv na posesivni dativ, niti igde gde se zahteva enklitika. 

Ali da ne idemo dalje u off-topic, možemo otvoriti posebnu temu...


----------



## Azori

Slovak:

1.) Včera som bratrancovi povedal celý príbeh. - no possessive pronoun

2.) Dnes nemôže hrať -- zlomil *si* ruku. - reflexive pronoun

Dnes nemôže hrať -- má zlomenú ruku. - no possessive pronoun

3.) Keď prišiel domov, umyl *si* zuby a šiel spať. - reflexive pronoun

4.) Nastúpil do auta a odišiel. - no possessive pronoun


----------



## DenisBiH

Duya said:


> Da, koristi se i na jugu Srbije. Ne bih znao zašto je enklitika "si" nestala iz aktivne upotrebe u štokavskim govorima, a prognana je i iz standarda -- dobro je formirana i jezički ekonomična. Naravno, postoji dugi oblik "sebi" ali on nije primenljiv na posesivni dativ, niti igde gde se zahteva enklitika.
> 
> Ali da ne idemo dalje u off-topic, možemo otvoriti posebnu temu...




Gramatika bosanskoga jezika (Jahić-Halilović-Palić) daje enklitički oblik si u dativu, no ga navode u zagradama (pretpostavljam da znači da je opcionalan?), i samo za jedninu, ne množinu.


----------



## Sobakus

Russian:
1)Вчера рассказал двоюродному брату весь/целый рассказ/историю. - no possessive, as is usually the case when talking about one's relatives in Russian

2)Сегодня он не может играть - (у него) рука сломана. - no possessive, the second part "at him an arm's broken" equals to имеет сломанную руку - "has a broken arm".
Сегодня он не может играть - сломал руку. - no possessive, "broke an arm". Add a possessive and you've got him breaking his own arm intentionaly(most probably with another hand)  You can use the reflexive one(себе), though it's optional.

3)Когда он пришёл домой, (то) почистил зубы и пошёл/лёг спать. - no possessive. With possessive, he would probably have taken his teeth out and cleaned them. Again the reflexive one is possible, but is more redundant then in previous case.

4)Он сел в машину и уехал. - again no possessive, but if it's not clear from the context, you can specify that the car is his and not someone else's.


----------



## Gochna

Gavril said:


> Do some Slavic languages omit possessive pronouns, so that only context can resolve who something belongs to? Here are some hypothetical examples:
> 
> 
> "I told cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday."
> 
> "He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken."
> 
> "When he got home, he brushed teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed."
> 
> "He got in car [= his car] and drove away."
> 
> 
> Which Slavic languages allow sentences like these?
> 
> Thanks



In Polish you can (or rather _should_) omit possesive pronouns because we understand that you normally wash your own teeth and can't play because your own arm is broken. So:

"I told cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday." *Opowiedziałam kuzynowi całą historię*. (It's a strange sentence, I'd rather give you an example of: _Powiedziałam mamie, że wrócę pózno_ - I told my mother that I'd be home late; you still have a family member and no possesive adjective required, but possible - _powiedziałam mojej mamie_ - but that would implied that there was another mother involved, sort of "you tell your mother and I tell mine"... )


"He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken."
*(On) nie moze dzisiaj grać bo złamał rękę* (or: *bo ma złamaną rękę*) - you can say *złamał sobie rękę*, but in my opinion it's not necessary

"When he got home, he brushed teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed."
*Kiedy wrócił do domu, umył zęby*. Impossible to put a possesive here.

"He got in car [= his car] and drove away." *Wsiadł w samochód i odjechał*. Impossible to put a possesive in here as well.

That's it


----------



## bibax

One can ask why do many Slavic languages insert the reflexive personal pronoun in dative? In Czech it is obligatory.

Zlomil *si* ruku. - Zlomil *si* je roko. - Złamał *sobie* rękę.

Zlomil ruku.


----------



## Sobakus

Well, we've got an elaborate system of reflexive pronouns don't we? We even have those reflexive verbs which form using the accusative reflexive pronoun sje/sja.


----------



## Gavril

Hi everyone,

Is the possessive adjective/pronoun necessary in your language when the speaker is referring to a relative (mother, sister, etc.) of someone other than himself?

E.g., would the following sentences work in Slovene, or an equivalent sentences in other Slavic languages?

_Jan ni prišel danes v službo ker žena je bolana_ "Jan did not come to work today because [his] wife is ill"

_Ana je zdaj na dopustu; skrbi za mamo._ "Ana is on leave right now; she is taking care of [her] mother."

Thanks


----------



## Словеса

Russian: here comes the construction with the preposition "у". It is usually advertised as a translation for verbs like _I have, j'ai_ etc, but the reality is both more simple and more complicated: it is a part of the clause that relates the action or situation (in a specific case, the situation of being present) to someone. So we have, «Ян не пришёл на работу, потому что у него заболела жена». No possessive pronoun is usually used in such case (I think), and the need for such compensating means is determined by the context, often there is no such need.


----------



## Словеса

I would like also to share the following. As for the possessive adjectives in the general case, this depends on the choice. My choice disagrees with the choice of Sobakus on one sentence:


Gavril said:


> "I told cousin [= my cousin] the whole story yesterday." Я вчера своему двоюродному брату всё рассказал. (the reflexive possessive adjective)
> "He can't play today -- arm [= his arm] is broken." Он не может сегодня играть, у него сломана рука (no possessive adjective, but the construction "у него" is present)
> The same sentence in the first person makes it different: Не могу играть сегодня — рука сломана. (no possessive adjective)
> "When he got home, he brushed teeth [= his teeth] and went to bed." Пришедши домой, он почистил зубы и лёг спать. (no possessive adjective)
> "He got in car [= his car] and drove away." Он сил в машину и поехал. (no possessive adjective)


Whether you insert the possessive adjective or not, I think, depends on how much meaning you give to the fact whose is the thing (in this case the cousin), how is his affiliation to me or anybody else important for our future actions and dispositions. For example, here the point of my reporting was that "the whole story" is no longer a secret; for this, the affiliation of the cousin is surely important: if I tell the story to someone who does not know me it makes no difference to me personally, it's still a secret in a way.


----------

