Priming Maltese plurals

We investigate the storage and processing of sound and broken plural forms in the Maltese lexicon by means of a cross-modal priming study. The results show no significant differences in reaction time between sound and broken plurals, but indicate a different priming effect for sound than for broken plurals. We argue that the different priming effect is a result of the phonological overlap between sound singulars and their corresponding plurals forms, while broken singulars and their plurals do not share the same phonological structure. Our results support a single-mechanism model of morphological processing in which both frequency of pattern and morphophonological similarity interact.

Broken plurals and (mis)matching of ɸ-features in Tunisian Arabic

The aim of this paper is to explain an unusual agreement pattern that arises between Tunisian Arabic broken plurals and their targets. For example, a verb may agree with a plural subject in all ɸ-features or, rather oddly, in singular/feminine, even when the subject (the controller) is masculine plural. Developing an idea first briefly sketched—but ultimately not adopted—by Zabbal (2002), we argue that broken plurals are hybrid nouns. Hybrid nouns have been the topic of much recent research (Corbett, 2000, 2015; den Dikken, 2001; Wechsler and Zlatić, 2003; Danon, 2011, 2013; Matushansky, 2013; Landau, 2015; Smith, 2015): either their syntactic or semantic features can be the target of agreement, creating the possibility of an agreement mismatch. Using Harbour’s (2011, 2014) theory of number, coupled with some innovations, we provide the featural make-up of Tunisian Arabic broken plurals and contrast it with that of collectives, on the one hand, and sound plurals, on the other. We propose that the feminine agreement seen with broken plurals is associated with a [+ group] feature, one that is exponed as -a. In the course of the discussion, we will argue that all gender features are visible at LF (Hammerly, 2018) and that semantic agreement is routinely possible with nouns that are low on the Animacy Hierarchy.

Jam‘u at-Taksīr dan Tejemahnya dalam “Al-Quranul Karim Bacaan Mulia” karya H.B Jassin (Kajian Shorfiyah)

This reaserch is discuss about forms of the Broken Plural along with the translation contained in “Al-Qur’anul Karim Bacaan Mulia”, written by Indosesian writer he is H.B Jassin who has translated Al-Qur’an by poetic language. The restricting the problem of this reaserch are the only forms of the Broken Plural in Letter of Al-Noor. In this study, the researcher used the qualitive method of library study. Qualitive method are research methods that produce descriptive data in the form of written words, from books relating to research problems. Using the theory of morphologi to determinate the patterns of the Broken Plural in the object of studies. As for the results, found 31 of Broken Plurals by denying some of the same words. There are 14 words of Lesser Broken Plural in Letter of Al-Noor with three patterns, which are اَفعُل، افعِلة ، افعال. There are 14 words of Greater Broken Plural with six patterns, which are فعلاء، فعول، فعال، فِعْلان، فَعلى، وفعُل, and 3 words of Ultimate Plural (Ṣīgah Muntaha al-Jumu‘) which are: ف واعل، فعاليل، مفاعل.Then the suitability of H.B Jassin in translating the Broken Plural in his creation, it’s “Al-Qur’anul Karim Bacaan Mulia”.

Multiple Broken Plurals of a Singular Noun in the Holy Qur'an

Multiplicity of broken plurals of a singular noun is a noteworthy case both in the Arabic language in general and the Qur'anic text in particular. It is sensible to attribute such a phenomenon in the Arabic language to dialectical variation, but the case should not be the same with such a homogeneous and eloquent text as the Qur' an. After extracting all examples of this kind used in the Qur'an and thinking deeply about them, I have come to the conclusion that the following reasons may be the most important ones: First: Expressing the meaning of fewness in opposition to abundance. The Qur'an in this connection follows four ways: a) Using a plural of fewness in opposition to a plural of abundance, such as (ancum) and (nicam). b) Using a rare-pattern plural in opposition to a widespread one, such as (dhukrān) and (dhukūr), regardless of the plural form meaning. c) Using a plural in opposition to a plural of the plural, such as (aswira) and (asāwir). d) Using a sound plural in opposition to a broken plural, such as (sunbulāt) and (sanābil). Second: Changing the pattern of the plural to specify the intended meaning of the singular, wherever it has two different meanings. In this connection I may refer to the two plurals of the singular (cyn) which are (acyun) and (cuyūn). The Qur'an confined the first to the meaning of an eye and the second to the meaning of a spring. Third: Changing the pattern of the plural to denote totality in opposition to specialness. In this connection I may refer to the two plurals (hamīr) and (humur) where the first one refers to a domestic donkey and the second to a wild one. Fourth: Changing the kind of plural to be either a broken plural or a sound plural where the first refers to nominality such as (rawāsī), whereas the second refers to descriptiveness such as (rāsiyāt). Fifth: Changing the pattern of the plural to specify either femininity or masculinity. The first is a plural such as (qawācid) and the second is such as (qucud) and (qācidūn).