# All Slavic languages: Possessives



## jazyk

Czech has a sui generis way of constructing possessives (very similar to English _'s_) by adding suffixes to nouns and adjectivizing them, which means they are declined according to gender, number and case. An example to extricate you all from my inability-to-express-myself bog: the sister's car: sestřino auto (sestra + a suffix them crazy Czechs add). I've seen (very sporadically) the same phenomenon in written Russian (I don't remember how to do it, though), but Polish and Russian do allow for noun + genitive: samochód siostry, афтомобиль сестры. My question to all my beloved Slavic speakers is: does this Czech thingie exist in your own language as well?


----------



## Thomas1

jazyk said:


> Czech has a sui generis way of constructing possessives (very similar to English _'s_) by adding suffixes to nouns and adjectivizing them, which means they are declined according to gender, number and case. An example to extricate you all from my inability-to-express-myself bog: the sister's car: sestřino auto (sestra + a suffix them crazy Czechs add). I've seen (very sporadically) the same phenomenon in written Russian (I don't remember how to do it, though), but Polish and Russian do allow for noun + genitive: samochód siostry, афтомобиль сестры. My question to all my beloved Slavic speakers is: does this Czech thingie exist in your own language as well?


Hm... I would say no, and generally it is no.  But, you can sometimes do the same in Polish (really sporadically), and usually ( I say usually since I am not sure if this applies to all nouns + a suffix) the meaning changes. And your example could be done this way but here the meaning is in 99% of cases different, have a look:
_sister's car_
is normally translated as you did, i.e.:
_samochód siostry_
but you can also say:
_siostrzany samochód_
it means a very similar car, almost the same. Although, in the following sentence _siostrzany _could indicate the owner:
_-Tu stoi samochód mój i mojego brata, tam dalej mojego ojca, a jeszcze dalej mojej mamy._
_-A gdzie stoi siostrzany samochód?_
This sounds quirky, neverthelss.

The only case* where I sometimes hear people use this kind of structure is when someone is refering to someone's wife,
_Ta Jarkowa to fajna dziewczyna, dobrą żonę sobie wybrał._
_(This) Jerry's wife is a nice girl, he picked himself a good wife._
You wouldn't hear that from a young person, at least I don't use it, my grand-parents used it and some of my aunts/uncles still do, they are generally older people.


Unless you have in mind something like the following: _car keys -- kluczyki samochodowe_, but this is a different kettle of fish, I think.

Tom


----------



## jazyk

> Unless you have in mind something like the following: _car keys -- kluczyki samochodowe_, but this is a different kettle of fish, I think.


You're totally right. I wasn't referring to that. Thanks for the great post, by the way.


----------



## Jana337

> Unless you have in mind something like the following: _car keys -- kluczyki samochodowe_, but this is a different kettle of fish, I think.


Indeed, this is different. 

***

Interesting. Let me add that - unlike English - we always use noun + genitive if the possessor consists of more than 1 word (politika vlády Gerharda Schrödera, komentář ministerstva financí etc.).

sestřino auto - (...) sister's car (whose sister she is follows from the rest - see the subject)
_(1) Zničila sestřino auto. - She destroyed her sister's car._
auto mé sestry - my sister's car
_(2) Zničila auto mé sestry. - She destroyed my sister's car._
auto své sestry - (...) sister's car (whose sister she is follows from the rest - see the subject)
_(3) Zničila auto své sestry. - She destroyed her sister's car._
auto jeho sestry - his sister's car
_(4) Zničila auto jeho sestry. - She destroyed his sister's car.

_(1) and (3) mean the same in Czech. But it would sound awful if you translated them with "zničil auto sestry". Really ugly.

Jana


----------



## Crescent

jazyk said:


> I've seen (very sporadically) the same phenomenon in written Russian (I don't remember how to do it, though), but Polish and Russian do allow for noun + genitive: samochód siostry, *автомобиль* ( ) сестры. My question to all my beloved Slavic speakers is: does this Czech thingie exist in your own language as well?



Yep, I can confirm that when it comes to Russian, you're absolutely right! 
In some cases, the noun to which the object is belonging to simply changes to its genitive for, because the implied question is then: Автомобиль _кого_ или _чего_? - Сестры. 
And yes, I believe the weird Czech thingy as you call it, is also possible in

The question that is asked is: Чей, чья, чьи?
_Чья_ эта машина? - Это папина машина.
_Чей _это кот?       - Это мамин кот.
_Чьи_ это духи?     - Это мамины духи. 
 
However, with some nouns it's not possible - for example you can't say: _Это *братины* сапоги_  or _Это *сетсрины* цветы. 
_In this case, you have to put the noun which possesses the object into the genetive like in the example which you first gave us. 
Hope this helps!


----------



## Irbis

In Slovenian we generally use suffix (-ov of -ev for male gender, -in for female) to create possesive adjective from noun for living things (persons, animals, also companies and plants). For things (and phrases longer than one word) we use genitive form of noun on the right.

It is similar to Jana's Czech example:

Uničila (Razbila?) je sestrin avto.
Uničila je avto moje sestre.
Uničila je avto svoje sestre.
Uničila je avto njegove sestre.

Colloquially you could use:
Uničila je avto od sestre.
Uničila je avto sestre. (sounds realy strange)


----------



## Jana337

Irbis said:


> Uničila (Razbila?) je sestrin avto.
> Uničila je avto moje sestre.
> Uničila je avto svoje sestre.
> Uničila je avto njegove sestre.


Just a question on the fly: What does "je" stand for?

Jana


----------



## Irbis

Jana337 said:


> Just a question on the fly: What does "je" stand for?



"je" is in this case third person singular form of verb "biti" (to be, "is"), used to create past tense together with -l form of verb.
"je" can also be third person singular form of verb "jesti" (to eat) and short genitiv form of personal pronoun "ona" (she). The most common word in Slovenian.


----------



## Jana337

Irbis said:


> "je" is in this case third person singular form of verb "biti" (to be, "is"), used to create past tense together with -l form of verb.
> "je" can also be third person singular form of verb "jesti" (to eat) and short genitiv form of personal pronoun "ona" (she). The most common word in Slovenian.


Cool! We too from the past tense with "to be" but just in the 1st and 2nd person. Glad to see that the third one persists in another language. Thanks!

OK, no more off-topic questions (I didn't know that it was off-topic ); the topic was discussed here. 

Jana


----------



## Thomas1

Crescent said:


> [...]
> 
> However, with some nouns it's not possible - for example you can't say: _Это *братины* сапоги_ or _Это *сетсрины* цветы. _
> In this case, you have to put the noun which possesses the object into the genetive like in the example which you first gave us.
> Hope this helps!


Polish is a little similar to Russian here; you can't make this construction of any noun.

Here are a few that are possible:
_mamina sukienka_ - mother's dress
_maminsynek_ = mother's boy
In this case _mamin _and _synek_ became one word.
I also remember _tatusin(y)_ (daddy's) that exists, but I never heard anyone using it. _Braciany_ (brother's) doesn't work at all.
Nevertheless, these are rather kind of stock/fixed phrases and look rather like they are relicts of the construction in question. Maybe another Polish forer@ will come up with another example of this construction.

Tom


----------



## Anatoli

The use of genitive for possessions is common in Slavic languages except for Bulgarian/Macedonian where a preposition (на?) is used.



> However, with some nouns it's not possible - for example you can't say: _Это *братины* сапоги_  or _Это *сетсрины* цветы.
> _In this case, you have to put the noun which possesses the object into the genetive like in the example which you first gave us.


брат*овы* сапоги, сестр*ины* цветы are quite OK.


----------



## Maja

jazyk said:


> the sister's car: sestřino auto (sestra + a suffix them crazy Czechs add).


In Serbian: *sestrin auto* (sestra + in (m.) / ina (f.) / no (n.))

(1) Uništila je sestrin auto / auto svoje sestre. - She destroyed her sister's car.
(2) Uništila je auto moje sestre. - She destroyed my sister's car.
(3) Uništila je auto njegove/njene sestre. - She destroyed his/hers sister's car. 



jazyk said:


> Polish and Russian do allow for noun + genitive: samochód siostry, афтомобиль сестры. My question to all my beloved Slavic speakers is: does this Czech thingie exist in your own language as well?


It is possible to use it in Serbian as well:
- Čije je ovo auto? (Whose car is this?). 
- To je auto moje sestre (This is the car of my sister / my sister's car).


----------



## cajzl

> Czech has a sui generis way of constructing possessives (very similar to English _'s_) by adding suffixes to nouns and adjectivizing them, which means they are declined according to gender, number and case.


 
Exactly the same construction exists in Russian, too. Probably restricted to the surnames and local names.

E.g.
Ivanov, Ivanova, Ivanovo
Petrov, Petrova, Petrovo
...

Petrov = Petrov syn (Peter's son)
Petrovo = Petrovo selo (Peter's village)

Ivanin, Ivanina, Ivanino
Ovečkin, Ovečkina, Ovečkino
...


----------



## mcibor

I Polish it is possible to use brother's, but only to his family:

brother's wife: bratowa
brother's son: bratanek
brother's daughter: bratanica

sister's husband: szwagier (wrong example  )
sister's son: siostrzeniec
sister's daughter: siostrzenica

I can't think of any other example

Michał Cibor


----------



## cajzl

IMHO we are talking about the suffixes *-ov, -ova, -ovo* (for male persons) and *-in, -ina, -ino* (for female persons).

For example:

chlapc*ova* košile - boy's shirt
dívč*ina* sukně - girl's skirt
učitel*ovy* knihy - teacher's books
tetičč*ini* psi - aunt's dogs

As you can see in Czech these suffixes are quite universal (for persons OC).


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

If I understand Jazyk correctly, he wants to know if this fenomenon exists only in Czech language or also in other Slavic languages. 
Well, it does exist also in Slovene, Croatian and Serbian. The very same logic. Even the sufixes are very similar.


Če razumem Jazyk pravilno, hoče vedeti, če ta fenomen obstaja le v češčini ali tudi v drugih slovanskih jezikih.
Prav. Obstaja tudi v slovenščini, hrvaščini in srbščini. Ista logika. Celo končnice so si zelo podobne.


----------



## jazyk

Razumeš pravilno.


----------



## natasha2000

Maja said:


> In Serbian: *sestrin auto* (sestra + in (m.) / ina (f.) / no (n.))
> 
> (1) Uništila je sestrin auto / auto svoje sestre. - She destroyed her sister's car.
> (2) Uništila je auto moje sestre. - She destroyed my sister's car.
> (3) Uništila je auto njegove/njene sestre. - She destroyed his/her sister's car.
> 
> 
> It is possible to use it in Serbian as well:
> - Čiji je ovo auto? (Whose car is this?).
> - To je auto moje sestre (This is the car of my sister / my sister's car).


 
I would like to add something to this sentence Nº3:

(3) Uništila je auto njegove/njene sestre. - She destroyed his/hers sister's car. 
This sentence means that a sister is not the sister of the person who destroyed the car, but is the sister of some third party. If X destroys a car, and the car is owned by X's sister, in Serbian the possesive is SVOJ/A/E, and it matches with the SISTER in gender and number.

(3) Uništila je auto *svoje* sestre. - She destroyed his/her sister's car.


----------



## natasha2000

Tolovaj_Mataj said:


> If I understand Jazyk correctly, he wants to know if this fenomenon exists only in Czech language or also in other Slavic languages.
> Well, it does exist also in Slovene, Croatian and Serbian. The very same logic. Even the sufixes are very similar.
> 
> 
> Če razumem Jazyk pravilno, hoče vedeti, če ta fenomen obstaja le v češčini ali tudi v drugih slovanskih jezikih.
> Prav. Obstaja tudi v slovenščini, hrvaščini in srbščini. Ista logika. Celo končnice so si zelo podobne.


 
It is pure possesive genitive, the second case, out of 7 in Serbian/Croatian .

(I suppose the same in Slovenian, but I'd better leave this to Tolovaj Mataj to answer )


----------



## chung

Slovak can express possession with the -Vv suffix like Czech, Croatian and Russian, but it works only for personal names.

Hanina matka = Matka Hany = Hana's mother.
Hanino dievca = Dievca Hany = Hana's girl.
Stefanov dom = Dom Stefana = Stefan's house.
Stefanova kniha = Kniha Stefana = Stefan's book.

Personally, I find the second way easier since it's the same structure as the frequently-used Polish structure for possession and my Polish and Slovak are better than my Czech and Croatian.


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

natasha2000 said:


> It is pure possesive genitive, the second case, out of 7 in Serbian/Croatian .
> 
> (I suppose the same in Slovenian, but I'd better leave this to Tolovaj Mataj to answer )


 
We don't talk about genitive here but about adjectives of possesion (_svojilni pridevniki_).
If Janez is a noun, then its genitive is Janeza, but adjective is Janezov (Janezova, Janezovo, etc...). Of course these adjectives can be declined: Janezov (nom.), Janezovega (gen.), Janezovemu (dat.), etc.
Maybe now you can see why using the term genitive is not appropriate.


But... we also can use genitive construction, but I'm not sure, if we may still talk about possessiveness or about the type. Examples: knjiga pesmi (the book of poems), zbirka znamk (the stamp collection) and such. This is a compound of two knowns, where the first one is declined in the sentence if needed, but the second always stays in genitive.


----------



## Jana337

chung said:


> Slovak can express possession with the -Vv suffix like Czech, Croatian and Russian, but it works only for personal names.
> 
> Hanina matka = Matka Hany = Hana's mother.
> Hanino dievca = Dievca Hany = Hana's girl.
> Stefanov dom = Dom Stefana = Stefan's house.
> Stefanova kniha = Kniha Stefana = Stefan's book.


So you are saing the second column is correct in standard Slovak? 

Jana


----------



## Tolovaj_Mataj

natasha2000 said:


> (3) Uništila je auto *svoje* sestre. - She destroyed his/her sister's car.


khhmmmm.... 
I guess the translation should be: she destroyed her sister's car. With no possibility of *his* sister's car, as the subject is female.  
(vice versa: Uništio je auto svoje sestre.)


----------



## chung

Either that, or none of my Slovak friends has bothered to correct my use of the second version.


----------



## natasha2000

Tolovaj_Mataj said:


> We don't talk about genitive here but about adjectives of possesion (_svojilni pridevniki_).
> If Janez is a noun, then its genitive is Janeza, but adjective is Janezov (Janezova, Janezovo, etc...). Of course these adjectives can be declined: Janezov (nom.), Janezovega (gen.), Janezovemu (dat.), etc.
> Maybe now you can see why using the term genitive is not appropriate.
> 
> 
> But... we also can use genitive construction, but I'm not sure, if we may still talk about possessiveness or about the type. Examples: knjiga pesmi (the book of poems), zbirka znamk (the stamp collection) and such. This is a compound of two knowns, where the first one is declined in the sentence if needed, but the second always stays in genitive.


 
Ayyyy! Zemljo otvori se!  
Of course it is possesive adjective... 
Oh, I am sooo embarassed.... I must admit that grammar theory of Serbian is not my strongest... 
Do you have in Slovenian a phrase:
Lupiš pa ostaneš živ?
 
Idem da se stidim...


----------



## Crescent

Anatoli said:


> The use of genitive for possessions is common in Slavic languages except for Bulgarian/Macedonian where a preposition (на?) is used.
> 
> 
> брат*овы* сапоги, сестр*ины* цветы are quite OK.



Oh yes... For some reason, I didn't think of that when I was typing out my previous post! Thank you Anatoli! 

EDIT: Although, I have to admit..saying them over to myself now..they still sound slightly weird! I mean, I am much more likely to say: _цветы сестры_ than _сетсрины цветы_. But I guess you meant that both versions are grammatically correct, with which I wholly agree. 

Happy New Year!


----------



## natasha2000

Tolovaj_Mataj said:


> khhmmmm....
> I guess the translation should be: she destroyed her sister's car. With no possibility of *his* sister's car, as the subject is female.
> (vice versa: Uništio je auto svoje sestre.)


 
Yes you're right. I forgot to remove HIS.

But although the reflexive adjective is "unisex", we still can see the sex of the destroyer from the participle of Serbian verb.

UništiO je auto svoje sestre. He destroyed his sister's car.
UništiLA je auto svoje sestre. She destroyed her sister's car.

The thing is that Serbian is more accurate that English when it comes to possessive adjectives. If the destroyer destroyed the car of a third person's sister, the sentence would still be the same in English, but in Serbian it wouldn't.

1. Petar je uništio kola svoje sestre. Peter destroyed his sister's car. (Peter's sister)
2. Ana je uništila kola svoje sestre. Ana destroyed her sister's car. (Ana's sister)

3. Petar je uništio kola njegove sestre. Peter destroyed his sister's car. (John's sister).

4. Ana je uništila kola njene sestre. Ana destroyed her sister's car. (Mary's sister).

I admit that the sentences 3 and 4 are not the best solutions in English, but they are also gramatically correct.


----------



## beclija

chung said:


> Slovak can express possession with the -Vv suffix like Czech, Croatian and Russian, but it works only for personal names.


Are you sure it _only _works for personal names? Because in Serbian/Croatian, it is very common with personal names _and family members_, being rather rare and a bit awkward with most common knowns (except maybe when the noun signifies a profession or similar of which only one member is contextually available, so you can say "popov" because your village has only one priest, but these contexts come close to personal names).

(A non-native's faulty intuitions.)


----------



## werrr

Jana337 said:


> So you are saing the second column is correct in standard Slovak?
> 
> Jana


Yes, it is not incorrect, but as for the style the first column is much better. 


chung said:


> Either that, or none of my Slovak friends has bothered to correct my use of the second version.


Yes, naturally. Do you bother to correct somobody's use of *car of my sister* in English?


beclija said:


> Are you sure it _only _works for personal names? Because in Serbian/Croatian, it is very common with personal names _and family members_, being rather rare and a bit awkward with most common knowns (except maybe when the noun signifies a profession or similar of which only one member is contextually available, so you can say "popov" because your village has only one priest, but these contexts come close to personal names).
> 
> (A non-native's faulty intuitions.)


In both Czech and Slovak it works with animate singular nouns in masculine or feminine.


----------



## Jana337

An article I saw today reminded me of this thread.
They wrote: Známe vraha Litviněnka, tvrdí Britové
Meaning: We know Litviněnko, the murderer
Should be: Známe Litviněnkova vraha



Jana


----------



## Grobar

Maja said:


> In Serbian: *sestrin auto* (sestra + in (m.) / ina (f.) / no (n.))
> 
> (1) Uništila je sestrin auto / auto svoje sestre. - She destroyed her sister's car.
> (2) Uništila je auto moje sestre. - She destroyed my sister's car.
> (3) Uništila je auto njegove/njene sestre. - She destroyed his/hers sister's car.
> 
> 
> It is possible to use it in Serbian as well:
> - Čije je ovo auto? (Whose car is this?).
> - To je auto moje sestre (This is the car of my sister / my sister's car).


I would not use Destroyed to translate "unistila" cause she has not "wrecked" the car.
For Destroy i would use "pokvarila"
How would you translate "unistiti"(derives from "nista" = nothing)?


----------

