2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-82
Author(s):  
Amer Dahamshe

This article compares Palestinian (Arabic) and Israeli (Hebrew) names of natural features in Palestine/Israel. Based on postcolonial reading and critical toponymy, I argue that despite the dominance of the Jewish nationalist narrative the nomenclature includes ‘intermediate categories’ that attest to subversive linguistic practices, bottom-up communication aspects, and sociocultural realities. These aspects are analysed through five main categories: unification; uniqueness; male rhetoric replacing female identity; sanitization; and linguistic imitation. The article adds to the literature largely focused on the political aspect of the Jewish settlement names that replaced Palestinian names in that it shows how Zionist naming of natural features included the cultural perspectives of the Palestinian names in order to appropriate them for internal Jewish cultural needs.


2016 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 279-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roni Henkin

AbstractThe sociolinguistic phenomenon of codeswitching, both diglossic and bilingual (Arabic–Hebrew), is extremely pervasive in all varieties of Palestinian Arabic, including Negev Arabic. Surprisingly, neither of these types of codeswitching in Palestinian Arabic has received due scholarly attention; moreover, their interplay has not been studied for any type of Arabic. This article analyses quantitative and functional aspects of diglossic and bilingual codeswitching in the personal interview style of 11 Negev Bedouin female students, focusing on their functional interaction. In the five distinct registers analysed, ratios of both diglossic and bilingual codeswitching were found to rise from childhood narratives to recounts of the period of academic studies and expository sections, with the use of Hebraisms dropping in the more formal registers. Although mixed bilingual discourse with intensive codeswitching is the default style for in-group discourse of the young generation, I show that many switches are not random, but fulfil discourse-pragmatic, communicative, social and textual functions typical of each of the registers. For example, in the narrative registers, switching may mark evaluation (commenting, explaining, self-repair, sidetracking, repetition). In both narrative and non-narrative discourse it may mark quotations, rephrasing or paraphrasing, with or without a metalinguistic introducing particle such as ‘as they say’. The result is redundancy at the referential level, with pragmatic functions of emphasizing or elaborating at the discourse level. This is in keeping with functions identified for bilingual codeswitching in general and also for diglossic codeswitching in Arabic; but it is the first effort, as far as I know, to combine analysis of the two codeswitching dimensions in any given code; and, moreover, to study the interplay of this bi-dimensional switching with relation to the stylistic factors of genre and register.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rozanna J. Aitcheson ◽  
Soleman H. Abu-Bader ◽  
Mary K. Howell ◽  
Deena Khalil ◽  
Salman Elbedour

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
pp. 103-118
Author(s):  
Samir Khalaily

Abstract This paper presents an analysis of a Palestinian Arabic negation-associated exclusive construction featuring the contrastive focus marker illa ‘but’, with theoretical implications for the syntax of negation, negative polarity item licensing, and the categorical status of the root in sentential syntax. It analyzes illa-phrases as constituents licensed by a c-commanding sentential negation (Neg), and illa as a grammatical device encoding contrastiveness. A crucial source for the exclusive semantics of the construction comes from a silent bass ‘only’ immediately following illa that constitutes a syntactic ‘shield’ against Neg scope. Rather than taking an in-situ focus-interpretation approach (cf. Rooth 1985, 1992), we argue for two covert movements at the syntax-semantics interface: quantifier raising of illa-phrases to the designated specifier of polarity Phrase followed by Polarity-to-Focus-raising of Neg. This creates the right syntactic configuration for the truth conditional import of both operators and captures the ‘classical’ thought that focus-sensitive exclusive operators like only quantify over propositional alternatives.


Author(s):  
Bronwyn M. Bjorkman ◽  
Claire Halpert

Much work has focused on the use of “fake”’ past in marking counterfactual clauses. This chapter focuses instead on the contribution of aspect, evaluating claims that some languages require both fake past and fake (imperfective) aspect in counterfactual clauses. We argue that this appearance is an illusion, resulting from the fact that past tense forms are aspectually underspecified in many languages: this underspecification gives rise to an apparent requirement for imperfective marking in some languages (e.g. French, Zulu), but an apparent requirement for perfective marking in others (e.g. Palestinian Arabic). Finally, we suggest that in languages that truly require imperfective marking in counterfactuals, the requirement is for imperfective simpliciter, independent of tense (Hindi, Persian). The resulting typological picture has implications for how fake temporal marking is structurally represented in counterfactual clauses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document