This paper employs comparative evidence from two closely-related Quechua languages to
argue that predicative possession constructions do not always share a single underlying source crosslinguistically
(contra Freeze 1992; and in support of Boneh & Sichel 2010; Levinson 2011). This
Quechua case study is especially striking in that the constructions involved are superficially almost
identical–the crucial differences between them emerge only when theoretically-informed fieldwork
is carried out