Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T06:54:18.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Criterial Freezing approach to subject extraction in Jordanian Arabic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2017

Marwan Jarrah
Marwan Jarrah*
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle
*
m.a.s.jarrah@newcastle.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Using the Criterial Freezing approach to movement and chain formation (Rizzi 2005, 2006, 2014; Rizzi and Shlonsky 2006, 2007), this study explores the strategies Jordanian Arabic makes available for subject extraction. I argue that subject extraction in this variety of Arabic is constrained by the postulated D-linking condition of the Subject Criterion – i.e., [spec,SubjP] is filled by an element with the same D(iscourse)-linking status as that of the subject wh-word (D-linked vs. non-D-linked). In case of questions with a D-linked wh-word, [spec,SubjP] can be filled by the D-linked particle illi or a deictic (time-point/place-point) adjunct. Unlike time-point adjuncts, the use of place-point adjuncts to fill [spec,SubjP] is subject to the effects of the Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky 2001), given their low base positions. In contrast, in case of questions with a non-D-linked wh-word, I assume that [spec,SubjP] is filled by an expletive pro.

Résumé

La présente étude s'appuie sur l'approche dite Criterial Freezing (Immobilité critériale) appliquée au mouvement et à la formation des chaînes (Rizzi 2005, 2006, 2014, Rizzi et Shlonsky 2006, 2007), pour analyser les stratégies que rend disponibles l'arabe jordanien afin effectuer l'extraction du sujet. Je soutiens que l'extraction du sujet, dans cette variété d'arabe, est contrainte par le postulat de la condition de la liaison-D du Critère du Sujet – c-à-d. que [spec,SubjP] est rempli par un élément ayant le même statut de liaison-D(iscursive) que le sujet Qu- (soit D-lié, soit non D-lié). Dans le cas des questions contenant un ‘mot Qu-’ qui est D-lié, le Spec de SubjP peut être rempli par la particule D-liée illi, ou alors par un adjoint déictique (point-temps/point-lieu). Contrairement aux adjoints point-temps, l'utilisation des adjoints point-lieu pour remplir [spec,SubjP] est sujette aux effets de la Condition d'Impénétrabilité des Phases (Chomsky 2001), étant donné leurs basses positions de base. Par contre, dans le cas des questions avec un ‘mot Qu-’ non D-lié, j'affirme que [spec,SubjP] est rempli par un pro explétif.

Keywords

D-LinkingCriterial Freezingsubject extractionPhase TheoryJordanian ArabicLiaison-DImmobilité critérialeextraction du sujetthéorie des phasesarabe jordanien
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 62 , Issue 3 , September 2017 , pp. 411 - 448
Copyright
© Canadian Linguistic Association/Association canadienne de linguistique 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 9th Days of Swiss Linguistics at Geneva University and at the 46th Poznań Linguistic Meeting at Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań. I would like to thank the audience at these meetings for their useful input. In addition, I would like to thank my PhD supervisors Prof. Anders Holmberg and Dr. Geoffrey Poole for their invaluable comments on earlier draft of this paper. I am also indebted to two CJL reviewers for their criticism and helpful remarks which have led to significant improvements.

References

Abe, Jun. 2015. The EPP and subject extraction. Lingua 159: 1–17.Google Scholar
Adger, David. 2007. Stress and phasal syntax. Linguistic Analysis 33(3/4): 238–259.Google Scholar
Al-Balushi, Rashid. 2012. Why verbless sentences in Standard Arabic are verbless. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics 57(1): 1–30.Google Scholar
Al-Momani, Islam. 2015. Overt and null subject pronouns in Jordanian Arabic. Advances in Language and Literary Studies 6(4): 1–10.Google Scholar
Al-Sarayreh, Atef. 2013. The licensing of negative sensitive items in Jordanian Arabic . Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph E., Benmamoun, Elabbas, and Choueiri, Lina. 2010. The syntax of Arabic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arsenijević, Boban. 2009. Clausal complementation as relativisation. Lingua 119(1): 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belletti, Adriana. 2002. Aspects of the low IP area. In The structure of IP and CP. The cartography of syntactic structures Vol. 2 , ed. Rizzi, Luigi, 16–52. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana, and Rizzi, Luigi. 2013. Ways of avoiding intervention: Some thoughts on the development of object relatives, passive and control. In Rich languages from poor inputs, ed. Piattelli-Palmarini, Massimo and Berwick, Robert C., 115–126. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas. 1998. Spec-head agreement and overt case in Arabic. In Specifiers: Minimalist approaches, ed. Adger, David, Pintzuk, Susan, Plunkett, Bernadette, and Tsoulas, George, 110–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The featural structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Biberauer, Theresa, Holmberg, Anders, Roberts, Ian, and Sheehan, Michelle. 2009. Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2000. The rich agreement hypothesis in review. Ms., McGill University.Google Scholar
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2002. A-chains at the PF-interface: Copies and covert movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20(2): 197–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric, and Grohmann, Kleanthes. 2004. ‘SubMove: Towards a unified account of scrambling and D-linking. in Peripheries, ed. Adger, David, de Cat, Cécile, and Tsoulas, George, 241–257. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Brustad, Kristen E. 2000. The syntax of spoken Arabic: A comparative study of Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian, and Kuwaiti dialects. Georgetown: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Campos, Héctor. 1997. On subject extraction and the anti-agreement effect in Romance. Linguistic Inquiry 28(1): 92–119.Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen. 1997. On the typology of wh-questions. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, ed. Martin, Roger, Michaels, David, and Uriagereka, Juan, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. Kenstowicz, Michael, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics, ed. Gärtner, Hans-Martin and Sauerland, Uli, 1–30. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and the universal hierarchy of functional projections. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Costantini, Francesco. 2010. On infinitives and floating quantification. Linguistic Inquiry 41(3): 487–496.Google Scholar
Demuth, Katherine. 1995. Questions, relatives, and minimal projection. Language Acquisition 4(1/2): 49–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diercks, Michael J. K. 2010. Agreement with subjects in Lubukusu . Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.Google Scholar
É Kiss, Katalin, ed. 1995. Discourse configurational languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fakih, Abdul-Hafeed Ali. 2014. Subject Wh-Movement in Najrani Arabic and Minimalism. International Journal of Linguistics 6(5): 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felser, Claudia. 2004. Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity. Lingua 114(5): 543–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández, Ángel Luis. 2009. On the composite nature of subject islands: A phase-based approach. SKY Journal of Linguistics 22: 91–138.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner. 2004. Notes on the syntax and the pragmatics of German left-dislocation. In The syntax and semantics of the left periphery, ed. Lohnstein, Horst and Trissler, Susanne, 203–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gad, Rehab Farouk. 2011. A syntactic study of WH-Movement in Egyptian Arabic within the Minimalist Program . Doctoral dissertation, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
Galal, Mohamed. 2004. Relativizer illi in Arabic dialects. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics 27: 44–65.Google Scholar
Gallego, Ángel J., and Uriagereka, Juan. 2007. Conditions on sub-extraction. In Coreference, Modality, and Focus, ed. Eguren, Luis and Fernández-Soriano, Olga, 45–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2010. The internal syntax of adverbial clauses. Lingua 120(3): 628–648.Google Scholar
Harbert, Wayne, and Bahloul, Maher. 2002. Postverbal subjects in Arabic and the theory of agreement. In Themes in Arabic and Hebrew syntax, ed. Shlonsky, Ur and Ouhalla, Jamal, 45–70. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holes, Clive. 1990. Gulf Arabic. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. 2000. Scandinavian stylistic fronting: How any category can become an expletive. Linguistic Inquiry 31(3): 445–483.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders, and Hróarsdóttir, Thorbjörg. 2004. Agreement and movement in Icelandic raising constructions. Lingua 114(5): 651–673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders, and Roberts, Ian. 2013. The syntax–morphology relation. Lingua 130, 111–131.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard S. 2005. Movement and silence. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenstowicz, Michael. 1989. The null subject parameter in modern Arabic dialects. In The null subject parameter, ed. Jaeggli, Osvaldo and Safir, Kenneth J., 263–275. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Lahne, A. 2008. Local modelling of long distance agreement. Paper Presented at the 31st GLOW Conference, University of Newcastle, 26–28 March 2008.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2007. EPP extensions. Linguistic Inquiry 38(3): 485–523.Google Scholar
Landau, Idan. 2008. Two routes to control: Evidence from case transmission in Russian. Paper Presented at the 31st GLOW Conference, University of Newcastle, 26–28 March 2008.Google Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne. 2003. Some interface properties of the phase. Linguistic Inquiry 34(3): 506–515.Google Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne. 2012. The size of phases. In Phases: Developing the framework, ed. Gallego, Ángel J., 233–250. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Lewis, Robert. 2013. Complementizer Agreement in Najdi Arabic . Doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas.Google Scholar
Mohammad, Mohammad. 1990. The problem of subject-verb agreement in Arabic: Towards a solution. In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics, ed. Eid, Mushira and McCarthy, John, 95–127. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Osman, Mariam Hussein. 1990. The Syntax and logical form of wh-interrogatives in Cairene Egyptian Arabic . Doctoral dissertation, University of Washington.Google Scholar
Polinsky, Maria, Gallo, Carlos Gómez, Graff, Peter, Kravtchenko, Ekaterina, Morgan, Adam Milton, and Sturgeon, Anne. 2013. Subject islands are different. In Experimental syntax and island effects, ed. Sprouse, Jon and Hornstein, Norbert, 286–310. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Potsdam, Eric. 2006. The cleft structure of Malagasy wh-questions. In Clause structure and adjuncts in Austronesian languages, ed. Gärtner, Hans-Martin, Law, Paul, and Sabel, Joachim, 195–232. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Richards, Marc. 2007. On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38(3): 563–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized Minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar, ed. Haegeman, Liliane, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and the left periphery. In Structure and Beyond, ed. Belletti, Adriana, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2005. On some properties of subjects and topics. In Contributions to the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, ed. Brugè, Laura, Giusti, Giuliana, Munaro, Nicola, Schweikert, Walter, and Turano, Giuseppina, 203–224. Venice: Cafoscarina.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2006. On the form of chains: Criterial positions and ECP effects. In Wh-movement: Moving on, ed. Cheng, Lisa Lai-Shen and Corver, Norbert, 97–134. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2010. On some properties of criterial freezing. In The complementizer phase: Subjects and operators, ed. Panagiotidis, E. Phoevos, 17–32. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2014. Some consequences of Criterial Freezing. In Functional structure from top to toe: The cartography of syntactic structures 9, ed. Svenonius, Peter, 19–46. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2015. Cartography, criteria, and labeling. In Beyond the functional sequence: The cartography of syntactic structures 10, ed. Shlonsky, Ur, 314–338. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi, and Shlonsky, Ur. 2006. Satisfying the subject criterion by a non-subject: English locative inversion and Heavy NP shift. In Phases of interpretation, ed. Frascarelli, Mara, 341–361. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi, and Shlonsky, Ur. 2007. Strategies of subject extraction. In Interfaces + recursion = language? Chomsky's minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics, ed. Gärtner, Hans-Martin and Sauerland, Uli, 115–160. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1992. Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 23(3): 443–468.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2002. Constituent questions in Palestinian Arabic. In Themes in Arabic and Hebrew syntax, ed. Ouhalla, Jamal and Shlonsky, Ur, 137–159. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2014. Subject positions, subject extraction, EPP and the Subject Criterion. In Locality, ed. Aboh, Enoch Oladé, Guasti, Maria Teresa, and Roberts, Ian, 58–85. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Soltan, Usama. 2006. Standard Arabic subject-verb agreement asymmetry revisited in an Agree-based minimalist syntax. In Agreement systems, ed. Boeckx, Cedric, 239–265. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Soltan, Usama. 2010. On strategies of question-formation and the grammatical status of the Q-particle huwwa in Egyptian Arabic wh-questions. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(1): 1–10.Google Scholar
Speas, Margaret, and Yazzie, Evangeline Parsons. 1996. Quantification and the position of noun phrases in Navajo. In Athabaskan language studies: Essays in honour of Robert W. Young, ed. Jelinek, Eloise, Golla, Victor, Midgette, Sally, Rice, Keren, and Saxon, Leslie, 35–80. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press.Google Scholar
Sportiche, Dominique. 1988. A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure. Linguistic inquiry 19(3): 425–449.Google Scholar
Stanton, Juliet. 2016. Wholesale late merger in Ā-movement: Evidence from preposition stranding. Linguistic Inquiry 47(1): 89–126.Google Scholar
Starke, Michal. 2001. Move dissolves into Merge: A theory of locality . Doctoral dissertation. University of Geneva.Google Scholar
Struckmeier, Volker. 2014. Ja doch wohl C? Modal particles in German as C-related elements. Studia Linguistica 68(1): 16–48.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Michael D. Sr. 2016. Relativization in Ojibwe . Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald. 1986. Som and the binding theory. In Topics in Scandinavian syntax, ed. Hellan, Lars and Christensen, Kirsti Koch, 149–184. Dordrecht: Reidel Google Scholar
de Vries, Mark. 2002. The syntax of relativization. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Wahba, Wafaa Aabdel-Faheem Batran. 1984. Wh-Constructions in Egyptian Arabic . Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar