Sergey Say (Institute for linguistic studies, RAS; St. Petersburg State University) 7. Prominent internal possessors in Bashkir 1 Abstract Bashkir (Turkic) definite possessors are invariably coded by genitives. Bashkir quasi-coordinate constructions in which the non-finite clause is headed by the converb in –p normally require co- referential subjects, but are sometimes acceptable if there is co-reference between a genitival possessor in either clause and the subject in the other clause. Typically, these prominent possessors are animate, topical and affected by the event, possessive relations are inalienable, and the respective possessed nominals are inanimate. However, none of these absolute requirements is obligatory; possessor’s ability to control co-reference is determined relatively: it must occupy the leftmost position in the clause and be more salient than other available noun phrases. The ability of genitival nominals in Bashkir to function as prominent possessors is related to their other exceptional properties: Bashkir genitives are used in many contexts where other languages switch to clause-level possessors. Keywords: animacy, Bashkir, body parts, constituency, converb, co-reference, genitive, inalienable possession, possessor, word order 7.1 Introduction In Bashkir, a Turkic language spoken in the Southern Urals, genitival possessors can sometimes be co-referential with the main clause subject in a bi-clausal construction which normally requires identity of subjects: (1) Bolat-təŋ kös-ö böt-öp eš-tän tuqta-nə Bulat-GEN strength-POSS.3 end-CVB work-ABL stop-PST ‘Bulat got exhausted and stopped working’; literally: ‘As Bulat’s i strength finished, (he i ) stopped working’ 2 The possessor in the dependent clause in (1) meets the definition of the prominent internal possessor (PIP) adopted in this volume: it is located within the subject noun phrase in the dependent clause but controls the same-subject relation across the two clauses. This kind of uses, even though arguably a marginal pattern in Bashkir, is the primary focus in this study. My analysis of the PIPs in Bashkir is largely based on the ample questionnaire by Nikolaeva et al. (2015), see also Chapter 1 (this volume). In particular, my aim is to identify those specific properties which make it possible for an internal possessor to be prominent for purposes of clause combining in Bashkir. Based on elicitation data, I will argue that these 1 I am greatly indebted to Daria Mishchenko, Maria Ovsjannikova and other co-expeditioners for fruitful discussions that helped me conduct this study and analyze its results. I am also grateful to the organizers and participants of the Workshop on Prominent Internal Possessors that took place at SOAS, University of London, on 22-23 September 2016, for their insightful feedback. Last but not least, I benefited a lot from detailed comments from the anonymous referee of earlier versions of this paper. The usual disclaimers apply. 2 The following abbreviations are used in this paper: 1, 2, 3 — 1 st , 2 nd , 3 rd person; ABL — ablative; ACC — accusative; AG — agent; ANT — anterior; CAUS — causative; CMPR — comparative; COND — conditional; COP — copula; CVB — converb; DAT — dative; GEN — genitive; IMP — imperative; IPFV — imperfective; JUSS — jussive; LOC — locative; NEG — negation; NMLZ — nominalization; NOM — nominative; NUM — numeral; ORD — ordinal; POSS — possessive; PASS — passive; PTCP — participle; PL — plural; POT — potential; PST — past; Q — question; REFL — reflexive; SG — singular; SUBST — substantivizer; TERM — terminative.