scholarly journals The Morphosyntax of Arabic Exceptives: A minimalist approach

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hussein Al-Bataineh
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Domain Restriction ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Focus Particle ◽  
Minimalist Approach ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
Syntactic Restrictions ◽  
Case Feature

Arabic exceptive constructions involve an intricate interaction among word order, negation, and case assignment resulting from syntactic restrictions imposed on the argumental, appositional, and adjunctive functions of exceptive phrases. The morphosyntactic complexities in Arabic exceptives cast doubt on the adequacy of previous analyses that exceptive particles are prepositions, focal adverbs, or coordinating conjunctions, and they also lead the paper to argue for more principled accounts in which exceptive particles are analyzed as functional heads that project into an ExP ‘exceptive phrase’ which exists in two distinct configurations. The first includes an exceptive marker carrying [Acc-Case] ‘accusative case’ and [DS] ‘domain subtraction’ features when the ExP is an adjunct introduced by late Merge. The second includes a negative determiner which selects and c-commands the exceptive particle and deactivates/ suspends its [Acc-Case], consequently, the case feature of the ExP-complement is valued by percolation from D which combines with the exceptive marker to form a discontinuous focus particle with a [DR] ‘domain restriction’ feature.

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 syntax of Arabic vocatives

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 328-360
Author(s):  
Hussein Al-Bataineh
Keyword(s):  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Proper Names ◽  
Basic Structure ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Indefinite Article ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Case Feature

Abstract This paper examines the syntactic structure of Arabic vocatives, focusing on case-marking of vocatives. The assignment of accusative and nominative-like case can be accounted for in the light of Hill (2017)’s proposal which provides the basic structure of the vocative phrase. This paper argues that in Arabic vocatives (i) the particle YAA is a transitive probe with valued [ACC-Case] and unvalued [2nd] and [Distance] features; (ii) The D has the unvalued case feature [u-Case], and it has both the [2nd] and [+Distance] features if it is a free pronoun and (iii) The vocative noun carries the valued [2nd] and [+/-Distance] features. Based on these assumptions, I argued that indefinite vocatives are assigned accusative case only if they are merged with an overt D -n, otherwise a nominative-like case surfaces on the noun by default. Proper names have the same analysis since the presence of the indefinite article -n is a prerequisite for accusative case assignment. Concerning vocatives as heads of Construct States, N-to-D movement takes place in order to assign [+def] feature to D and is assigned accusative case by YAA. Regarding vocatives in demonstrative phrases, the existence of a null D prevents the vocative noun from being assigned an overt accusative case. Concerning vocative pronouns, only accusative case is assigned since the determiner carrying the [u-Case] feature is overt.

scholarly journals The Syntactic Status of Arabic Clauses Introduced by ʔinna A Minimalist Study

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 70
Author(s):  
Mansour Qazan Alotaibi
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Standard Arabic ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Syntactic Status ◽  
Case Feature

A Standard Arabic (SA) complementizer known as ʔinna poses a restriction on word orders in the clause it introduces and induces accusative Case-marking on the otherwise nominative preverbal NPs (Note1). Following Chomsky’s (2001) account of the morphosyntax of Case, this paper argues that ʔinna is a Case assigner and thus it carries an uninterpretable Case feature that determines the value which it assigns to an unvalued Case feature concerning accessible goal within A-bar projection. The paper shows that this argument captures the asymmetrical word order between clauses introduced by ʔinna and those headed by null CPs. 

scholarly journals Remarks on the Arabic complementizer 'inna / Observações sobre o complementizador 'inna em árabe

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 1295
Author(s):  
Mansour Alotaibi
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Standard Arabic ◽  
Case Marking ◽  
Case Feature

Abstract: A Standard Arabic (SA) complementizer known as 'inna poses a restriction on word order in the clause it introduces and induces accusative Case-marking on the otherwise nominative preverbal NPs. Following Chomsky’s (2001) account of the morphosyntax of Case, this paper argues that 'inna is a Case assigner and thus it carries an uninterpretable Case feature that determines the value which it assigns to an unvalued Case feature concerning accessible goal within A-bar projection. The paper shows that this argument captures the restriction imposed on 'inna-clauses.Keywords: Arabic; complementizer; Case marking; word order; minimalism.Resumo: Um complementizador no árabe padrão, conhecido como 'inna, impõe uma restrição na ordem das palavras da oração por ele introduzida e induz marcação de Caso acusativo nos SNs preverbais que em outras circunstâncias têm marcação de Caso nominativo. Seguindo o modelo de Chomsky (2001) para a morfossintaxe de Caso, este artigo argumenta que 'inna é um designador de Caso e que ele carrega um traço de Caso não interpretável que determina o valor que o mesmo designa para um traço de Caso até então não marcado de uma meta acessível na projeção de A-barra. O artigo mostra que esse argumento captura as cláusulas 'inna impostas pela restrição.Palavras-chave: Árabe; complementizador; marcação de Caso; ordem de palavras; minimalismo.

scholarly journals Accusative case assignment to the verbal internal argument in the Albanian language and the corresponding case assigning model

2021 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joana Taci ◽  
Mirela Saraci
Keyword(s):  
Noun Phrase ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Case Assignment ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Accusative Case ◽  
Case System ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Free Word ◽  
European Family

The following paper aims at shedding some light on Albanian language case system with special focus on the assignment of accusative case. As a member of the vast Indo-European family Albanian language is characterized by an inflected case system and as so a free word order. Traditionally, we are taught and we still teach to the coming generations that accusative case is assigned mostly by the verb to that sentence noun phrase syntactically representing the direct object and semantically introducing the Theme or the Patient.   Moreover in Albanian accusative is also assigned by another morphological category bearing the distinctive features [+noun;+verb], namely the preposition. Furthermore, as a researcher in the field of generative syntax I have a stake at analyzing certain exceptional cases of accusative case assignment to the subject NP of the Albanian subjunctive clause. In conclusion, I was really tempted to adopt Chomsky’s reconciling proposal in accusative case assignment under the specifier-head structural and schematic relation. 

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Ian Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Language Design ◽  
Emergent Properties ◽  
Universal Principle ◽  
Theoretical Context ◽  
Classic Case ◽  
Word Order Variation ◽  
Minimalist Approach ◽  
Order Variation ◽  
Principles And Parameters

This chapter sets the work in its general theoretical context, introducing the central ideas to be developed in the following chapters—parameter hierarchies, and parameters as emergent properties of the three factors of language design—and briefly illustrates the way in which the principles-and-parameters idea can be maintained in current minimalist syntax by showing how the Final-Over-Final Condition (FOFC), taken to be a universal ‘principle’, interacts with and constrains cross-linguistic word-order variation (parameters). Whilst this is a classic case of ‘principle’ and ‘parameter’ interaction, both the principle and the parameter must derive from more elementary notions. In this way, we move towards a minimalist approach to principles and parameters, and to morphosyntactic variation in general. The Introduction ends with a brief summary of the topics of the chapters to follow.

When Syncretism Meets Word Order. On Clitic Order in Romanian

Probus ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 233-256
Author(s):  
Oana Săvescu
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Romance Languages ◽  
Person Plural ◽  
Accusative Case

Abstract Romanian singular clitics are unique among their counterpars in other Romance languages in that they exhibit different forms for dative (mi, ţi) and accusative case (mă, te). In contrast, 1st and 2nd person plural clitics are case syncretic: the forms ne and vă are used both in the dative and in the accusative. Moreover, in non-finite environments, following gerunds and imperatives, non-syncretic (singular) clitics unambiguously exhibit the order dative accusative, while syncretic (plural) clitics show the reverse, accusative dative order. This paper focuses specifically on this correlation between case syncretism (or lack thereof) and the ordering possibilities of postverbal clitics, showing that the relation receives a principled syntactic explanation. The ordering of postverbal Romanian clitics, as well as the contrast between case syncretic and syncretic clusters are derived through the interaction between (i) morpho-syntactic effects due to case syncretism, (ii) remnant VP movement, and (iii) a representational view on locality, in the spirit of Rizzi (2001), Krapova and Cinque (2005).

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.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document