Genitive Case and Possessive Adjective in Anatolian

One of the most famous features of the Anatolian Indo-European languages is the widespread use of an inflected adjective (that agrees with its head noun in gender, number and case) in place of the genitive case. In some languages use of this adjective leads to total or near total loss of the genitive. Less well-known is the variety of exponents of the genitive case itself in Anatolian. The following reexamination of this topic was directly stimulated by the article of Hajnal (2000). His analysis has led me to revise radically my own previous views, but in a very different direction from the one he proposes. I should make clear at the outset one fundamental difference in viewpoint. Hajnal argues (2000: 174ff.) that there was a consistent functional difference in PIE between the “individualizing genitive” and the “specifying” possessive adjective and (2000: 179ff.) that this difference is still discernible in the pattern of their use in Lycian and HLuvian. I cannot accept this claim for Lycian, where there is no functional difference between leθθi qlã “precinct of Leto” (adj.) and wazzije kbatra “daughter of Wazzije” (gen.), nor (pace Hajnal) between tebeija “of Tibe” (adj.) and Hlah “of Hla” (gen.), each of which respectively identifies the owner of the tomb. On the mixed syntax of possessive adjective and genitive in HLuvian see note 13 below. This artificial distinction has led Hajnal to what are in my view implausible historical derivations of some of the genitival endings. That the true denominative adjectives employed by some of the Anatolian languages originally meant merely ‘pertaining to’ or ‘having the quality of’ the base noun is not in question. However, the crucial innovation of the Anatolian languages (all those except Hittite) was precisely to use these adjectives interchangeably with and in some cases in place of the genitive case (thus with Mittelberger 1966: 99, 101 and 103).