Alienability is a grammatical category highlighting whether a noun’s complement is inherently bound to it, or separable. Often the category is self-evident; where it is not so, the decision can be either arbitrary or indicative of the subject’s opinion on the relationship between noun and complement. Rsiorna demonstrates alienability through two grammatical categories: pronouns and adjectives.
Consider the difference between the following examples:
- The hungry child
- The human child
The adjective hungry has an alienable relationship to the child; that is to say, it is possible for the child to lose its hunger, namely by eating.
Contrastly, the adjective human has an inalienable relationship to the child; that is to say, it is inherently impossible for the child to lose its human nature.
Alienability through pronouns is demonstrated via choice of grammatical case. The two cases used to demonstrate genitive (possessive) alienability are the accusative and dative cases.
In this instance, consider the difference between desires (alienable) and feet (inalienable):
|EN||their desires||their feet|
|RS||rsjírn ciatti||pioh ciarn|
Desires is alienable. It takes the dative case.
Feet is inalienable. It takes the accusative case.