A Comparative Analysis of the Expression of Possessive Relations in the Erzya Dialects of the Kochkurovo District, Republic of Mordovia

Introduction. The dialects of the Mordovian Prisurye are characterized by a developed system of possessive suffixes and feature various means and forms of expressing possessive relations. Until now, the dialectal system of possessive suffixes in certain Erzya dialects within the studied region has not been the subject of dedicated research. Therefore, an important objective of this article is to describe the dialectal features of possessive suffixes within the paradigms of noun declensions and their realizations in the Erzya dialects of the villages in the Kochkurovsky District of the Republic of Mordovia. The aim of the study is a comparative analysis of the paradigms of possessive suffixes and the ways of expressing possessive relations in this dialectal landscape. Materials and Methods. The research material includes field texts collected by the authors during linguistic expeditions to Erzya villages in the Prisurye region. Dialect material was gathered according to a questionnaire program that reflects the morphological variation of linguistic phenomena. An additional source of dialect data was obtained from the archives of the lexicography department at the Faculty of Philology of Mordovia State University. The study employs descriptive, structural, and comparative methods, which form the basis for analyzing the dialect material. Results and Discussion. The dialects of the Mordovian Prisurye region are divided into several local groups that differ from each other in lexical, phonetic, and morphological features. In this linguistic area, there is a mutual influence of linguistic phenomena characteristic of closely related languages and dialects. Research on the Mordovian landscape of Prisurye makes it possible to reveal the ways in which possessiveness is expressed in mixed Erzya-Moksha dialects. Dialect data allow for the analysis of grammatical forms of nouns that express possessive relationships, establish equivalents for the variation of personal-possessive suffixes within case paradigms, and uncover certain morphological features specific to these dialects. Conclusion. The means and forms of expressing possessiveness in the studied linguistic space are represented by a developed and diverse system. The conduct of the research has advanced our understanding of the specifics of the dialectal category of possession and made a certain contribution to the general theory of this phenomenon. We compare the recorded dialectal morphological markers of possession and their functioning in case paradigms and describe the features of morphosyntactic ways of expressing possessive relationships in the studied dialectal area.