scholarly journals The syntax of (complex) numerals in Arabic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein Al-Bataineh ◽  
Phil Branigan
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Morphological Structure ◽  
Arabic Numeral ◽  
Arithmetic Operations ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Order Case ◽  
Structural Relations ◽  
Multiplicative Arithmetic

Word order, case assignment, and agreement for gender and number are realised with remarkable complexity in the Arabic numeral system. This paper examines the internal morphological structure of simplex, compound, and complex numerals. We identify a recurrent pattern found both inside complex numerals and in the structural relations between numeral and the nouns they quantify. The structures uncovered then allow for more principled accounts of the superficial morphosyntactic complexities. The analysis suggests that DP contains a single Num head, but that Num can express both additive and multiplicative arithmetic operations.

Morphological Means in Russian: Clarification of the Concept

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (9) ◽  
pp. 23-33
Author(s):  
Galina I. Panova ◽  
Tatiana V. Viktorina ◽  
Antonina E. Kuzmina
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Morphological Structure ◽  
Russian Language ◽  
Word Form ◽  
Similar Function ◽  
Word Forms ◽  
The Status ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Linguistic Units ◽  
The Russian Language

The concept of “morphological / grammatical means” is widely used in studies on the Russian language, although there is no generally accepted interpretation. This work analyzes the reflection of this concept in Russian studies and clarifies the status of those linguistic units that are traditionally referred to as morphological means: form-building affixes, alternating sounds (internal inflection), stress, supplementary word stems, auxiliary words, intonation, as well as word order. Our research has shown that these linguistic units have different functional status in the morphological structure of the Russian language. First, these are categorical, or actually morphological, means, represented by formative affixes and auxiliary words. They are carriers of morphological meanings in the structure of abstracted morphological forms – the basic units of inflectional Russian morphology. Secondly, a non-categorical means, syncretic and accidental for morphology, are supplementary stems that contain not only lexical, but also morphological meaning and thus duplicate the expression of morphological information in a word form with a form-building affix. Thirdly, these are linguistic units that are not elements of the morphological structure, but have morphological significance, which is manifested in their ability to differentiate homonymous morphological forms in the structure of word forms (alternating sounds and stress) or utterances (intonation). Word order can also perform a similar function. The study allows us to clarify the definition of the concept under consideration: morphological means are linguistic units that are carriers of morphological meanings and constituents of morphological forms.

Word order, case, and agreement

Linguistics ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
JOSEPH F. FOSTER ◽  
CHARLES A. HOFLING
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Order Case

A processability approach to the development of case in L2 Icelandic

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-98
Author(s):  
María Garðarsdóttir ◽  
Sigríður Þorvaldsdóttir
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Developmental Sequences ◽  
Processability Theory ◽  
Case Development

Abstract This article presents the findings of a study on the development of case assignment in Icelandic as a second language within the context of Processability Theory (PT) and compares them with previous PT studies on the development of case in L2 German, Russian, and Serbian. We argue that initially, learners are only able to appropriately mark subjects and objects in canonical positions (e.g., subjnom v objacc ). Later they are also able to mark arguments with the appropriate case in sentences that deviate from canonical word order (e.g., objacc/dat v subjnom ). In order to examine the case development in L2 Icelandic, 148 learners were asked to fill in the blanks of sentences with missing core arguments. Our results replicate for the most part the previous findings for L2 German, Russian, and Serbian. As such, the present study adds to the typological plausibility of PT as a framework that predicts and explains developmental sequences.

Confirmation through replication

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shana Poplack
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Vowel Harmony ◽  
Integration Process ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Order Case

This chapter reviews a series of replications of the studies reported in previous chapters on eight typologically distinct language pairs, making use of a wide array of phonological, morphological, and syntactic diagnostics (e.g., vowel harmony, word order, case-marking, adjectival expression, nominal determination patterns, verb incorporation strategies). Wherever a conflict site between donor and recipient languages could be determined, lone items were systematically shown to behave like the latter, often to the point of assuming the fine details of its variable quantitative conditioning. Results confirm that the integration process and its outcome—grammatical identity of donor-language items with recipient-language counterparts—are universal.

Case and word order in Lithuanian

2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
pp. 239-288 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEVEN FRANKS ◽  
JAMES E. LAVINE
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Unusual Case ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
General Clause ◽  
Direct Objects ◽  
Case Licensing ◽  
Do So

This paper examines the unusual case and word order behavior of objects of infinitives in Lithuanian. In addition to lexically determined case idiosyncrasy, Lithuanian exhibits syntactically determined case idiosyncrasy: with infinitives in three distinct constructions, case possibilities other than accusative obtain. These cases (dative, genitive, and nominative) depend on the general clause structure rather than on the particular infinitive. Moreover, unlike ordinary direct objects, these objects appear in a position preceding rather than following the verb. It is argued that they move to this position in order potentially to be accessible for Case assignment by some higher Case-assigning head. In this way we unify the two superficially unrelated properties of non-canonical word order and Case. This movement, however, is not feature-driven in the sense of standard minimalist Case-licensing mechanisms. We characterize it as ‘agnostic’ in that it applies to an object with unvalued Case features, if that object reaches a point in the derivation where it has no recourse but to move because failure to do so would be fatal.

The syntax of participial adjuncts in Eastern Bengali

1989 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 373-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wim Van Der Wurff
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Theoretical Framework ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
Binding Properties ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Syntactic Properties

In this article I will discuss the syntactic properties of participial adjuncts in Eastern Bengali. From a GB-point of view, these constructions are quite interesting, because they can contain a nominative which is apparently not assigned by AGR, and because they show a quite intricate pattern of possibilities for coreference and disjoint reference, with some seemingly arbitrary differences among the three types of adjuncts. In Section 2, I shall present the empirical data for these constructions. In Section 3 I will discuss the relevant general syntactic principles of Eastern Bengali, specifically those responsible for Case-assignment, word-order, pro-drop (including ergative verbs) and binding properties. In Section 4, I will show that the characteristics of the participial constructions, including the apparently haphazard binding properties, follow from the general syntactic principles of Eastern Bengali, if we assume one simple statement for each type of adjunct. No further construction-specific stipulations need be made. To the extent that the analysis I propose can be upheld, it will constitute indirect support for the GB-mechanisms that are crucially involved in it. Apart from various principles of configurationality and binding, I will make use of the idea that there is no abstract AGR, in these cases at least, and also of the analysis of pro-drop as a silent clitic phenomenon, proposed in Safir (1985). It is of course a fact that the principles of grammar I appeal to still need to be investigated more carefully, and may have to be modified on the basis of data not yet taken into account or accurately analyzed. However, as they stand, the relevant principles of GB-theory appear to be able to account for the Eastern Bengali facts I discuss here. Apart from these more theoretical concerns, this paper naturally has an important descriptive component too, which I hope will make it also interesting to linguists working in a different theoretical framework and may stimulate linguists specifically concerned with Bengali to explore further the intricascies of this area of Bengali grammer.

scholarly journals The Derivation of Wh-Questions in Najrani Arabic

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 181
Author(s):  
Saud A. Mushait
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Nominative Case ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Phase Approach ◽  
Wh Questions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Edge Feature

The study explores the derivation of wh-questions in Najrani Arabic and attempts to answer the following questions: (i) Can wh-questions in Najrani Arabic be derived in VSO or SVO or both?, and (ii) How can Najrani Arabic wh-questions be accounted for within Chomsky’s (2001,2005, 2013,2015 ) Phase approach? The objective of the study is to present a unified analysis of the derivation of wh-questions in Najrani Arabic and show the interaction between Najrani Arabic data and Chomsky’s Phase framework. It has been shown that Najrani Arabic allows the derivation of wh-questions from the argument and non-argument positions in VSO word order. Given this, we assume that VSO is the unmarked order for the derivation of wh-questions in Najrani Arabic. In VSO, the subject DP does not raise to Spec-TP because the head T does not have the EPP feature: the latter attracts movement of the former. The verb raises to the head T of TP, while the subject DP remains in-situ in Spec-vP. Moreover, in Najrani Arabic intransitive structures, the phase vP does not have a specifier because it does not have an external thematic argument whereas in transitive constructions the vP has. Concerning case assignment, the phase vP merges with an abstract tense af (fix) on the head T, which agrees with and assigns invisible nominative case to the subject wh-word man ‘who’. We assume that the phase head C is the probe and has the Edge feature which attracts the raising of the subject wh-phrase to Spec-CP. Besides, we argue that the light transitive head v has an Edged feature which attracts the raising of the object wh-phrase aish ‘what’ to be the second (outer) specifier of vP. Being the phase head, the v probes for a local goal and finds the object wh-phrase aish; the v agrees with and assigns accusative case to the object wh-phrase aish. As the TP merges with a null interrogative head C, the phase head C has an Edge feature that attracts the raising of the object wh-word aish to Spec-CP for feature valuation. Following this, the null copies of the moved entities left after movement receive a null spellout in the phonological level and, hence, cannot be accessed for any further operation.

scholarly journals The Realization of (In)definiteness in Russian

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 84
Author(s):  
Tore Nesset
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Order Case

How are indefiniteness and definiteness realized formally in Russian? This article discusses the question with regard to word order, case-marking and pronouns.

Syntactic ergativity as absolutive movement in Tongic Polynesian

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-112
Author(s):  
Lauren Clemens ◽  
Rebecca Tollan
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Single Point ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Object A ◽  
Parametric Variation ◽  
Polynesian Languages

We propose a unified account of the presence of syntactic ergativity and the availability of variable post-verbal word order in the Tongic branch of Polynesian languages. In Tongan, ergative subjects cannot freely extract, and both VSO and VOS word orders are possible. By contrast, ergative subjects in Niuean freely extract, but word order with two full DP arguments is strictly VSO. We argue that these differences stem from a single point of parametric variation in the syntax: the locus of absolutive case assignment (Bittner & Hale 1996; a.o.). In Tongan, absolutive is assigned by T0, such that the object must A-move past the ergative subject, giving rise to extraction restrictions and the availability of VOS word order. In Niuean, absolutive is assigned by v 0; as such, there is no object A-movement, hence no extraction restrictions, and VOS is not possible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document