Danish to Hebrew: one written word can contain a complete personal relationship
A possessive relationship can be joined to the noun
Sproget.dk distinguishes Danish personal genitives such as hans and hendes from the inflected possessives min, mit, and mine. Those source forms help identify who is related to the following noun, rather than simply contributing another ordinary object.
Hebrew Universal Dependencies illustrates ספרו as his book, analysing the written form into a book-related noun and a possessive personal contribution. A Danish-to-Hebrew translation can therefore preserve a separate source possessive within one joined target word.
For an original Danish note identifying a person’s document, the absence of a standalone target word corresponding to hans does not independently establish that the owner vanished. Conversely, recognizing the document-related stem alone cannot show whose document the whole Hebrew expression identifies. Read the joined form as a construction containing both lexical and personal information.
An object-related personal form is a different relationship
The Hebrew overview separately illustrates a verb written with an accusative object contribution. Its example אהבתיה includes both the verbal statement and the reference to the person loved. The grammatical relationship is not possession merely because personal material is attached.
Danish distinguishes subject and object personal forms, and its official guidance notes object forms following prepositions. A Danish writer must therefore recover the actual source role before interpreting a joined Hebrew personal expression.
For an original Danish account, compare somebody describing the writer’s book with somebody describing the writer. The first contains a possessor inside a noun phrase; the second gives the writer as the affected participant of a description-related action. A Hebrew suffix associated with a person must belong to the correct relationship.
A target word containing more internal material than expected does not necessarily introduce another person. But collapsing every personal contribution into a generic his-or-her gloss can erase the distinction between an owner and an object of the action. The lexical host and governing construction determine how the personal material is interpreted.
Some other grammatical material is also attached in writing
The Hebrew overview describes several function elements written as prefixes, including the definite article and a conjunction. Its tokenization analysis separates their grammatical contributions without requiring writers to insert spaces into ordinary Hebrew spelling.
A Danish source noun phrase can express definiteness through nominal morphology and determining material. Hebrew may distribute that relationship differently within its written form. A longer target word is not automatically an unfamiliar single dictionary item that should be replaced wholesale.
For an original Danish message referring back to an established object, distinguish the object’s identity from its owner and from whether the noun phrase is definite. Those are separate grammatical contributions even when target spelling groups some of them together.
The practical comparison follows the Danish relationships through the full Hebrew phrase: what item is named, whether it is identifiable, and which person is its possessor or an event participant. Counting spaces cannot establish whether those relationships were translated; interpreting the complete target construction can.
Language references