scholarly journals The Syntax of Word Order Derivation and Agreement in Najrani Arabic: A Minimalist Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 48
Author(s):  
Abdul-Hafeed Ali Fakih ◽  
Hadeel Ali Al-Sharif
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Gender Agreement ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Split Cp ◽  
Order Derivation ◽  
Edge Feature

The paper aims to explore word order derivation and agreement in Najran Arabic (henceforth, NA) and examines the interaction between the NA data and Chomsky’s (2001, 2005) Agree theory which we adopt in this study. The objective is to investigate how word order occurs in NA and provide a satisfactorily unified account of the derivation of SVO and VSO orders and agreement in the language. Furthermore, the study shows how SVO and VSO word orders are derived morpho-syntactically in NA syntax and why and how the derivation of SVO word order comes after that of VSO order. We assume that the derivation of the unmarked SVO in NA takes place after applying a further step to the marked VSO. We propose that the default unmarked word order in NA is SVO, not VSO.  Moreover, we propose that the DP which is base-generated in [Spec-vP] is a topic, not a subject. We adopt Rizzy’s split-CP hypothesis on the basis of which we assume the existence of a Top Phrase (TopP) projection in the clause structure of NA. We postulate that the phase head C passes its ϕ-features to the functional head T and the Edge feature to TopP. We assume that T in VSO lacks the Edge feature which motivates movement of the subject DP to [Spec-TP]. As a consequence, the subject of VSO structure remains in situ in the subject position of [Spec-vP]. In addition, it explores subject-verb agreement asymmetry (henceforth, SVAA) and shows that the asymmetry in NA is not related to word order differences but rather to gender agreement differences.

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.

On the Subject of Negative Auxiliary Inversion

2018 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. 32-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Blanchette ◽  
Chris Collins
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Negative Polarity ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Negative Concord ◽  
Double Negation ◽  
Polarity Items ◽  
West Texas ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Scope Freezing

AbstractThis article presents a novel analysis ofNegative Auxiliary Inversion(NAI) constructions such asdidn't many people eat, in which a negated auxiliary appears in pre-subject position. NAI, found in varieties including Appalachian, African American, and West Texas English, has a word order identical to a yes/no question, but is pronounced and interpreted as a declarative. We propose that NAI subjects are negative DPs, and that the negation raises from the subject DP to adjoin to Fin (a functional head in the left periphery). Three properties of NAI motivate this analysis: (i) scope freezing effects, (ii) the various possible and impossible NAI subject types, and (iii) the incompatibility of NAI constructions with true Double-Negation interpretations. Implications for theories of Negative Concord, Negative Polarity Items, and the representation of negation are discussed.

Subject-verb agreement in Newfoundland French

1994 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth King
Keyword(s):  
Relative Pronoun ◽  
Gender Agreement ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Number Marking ◽  
The Third ◽  
Grammatical Variation ◽  
Third Person ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Plural Subject ◽  
The Third Person

ABSTRACTIn Newfoundland French the verb does not agree in number with a plural subject in one particular construction–subject relative clauses–but rather displays default singular marking. Agreement is made with the subject relative pronoun, which does not have a morphological feature for number associated with it. This absence of a number feature results in a form consistently spelled out as homophonous with the third-person singular. Gender agreement transmitted in subject relatives containing a predicate adjective is evidence that number marking is at issue, not agreement in general. An exception to this pattern is the (variable) marking of plural agreement in the il y en a construction, explained in terms that are independent from the analysis of the default singular. Newfoundland French agreement is then compared with data from other French varieties, and the approach taken in this study is compared with those of other studies of grammatical variation.

Changing EPP parameters

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lieven Danckaert
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Verb Movement ◽  
Modal Verbs ◽  
The Core ◽  
History Of ◽  
Parametric Change ◽  
T Domain ◽  
The Way

This chapter starts with a description of the core facts concerning the VPAux/AuxVP alternation in the history of Latin. In the case of modal verbs and infinitives, there is a clear decline of the head-final order VPAux, whereas Late Latin BE-periphrases surprisingly prefer this order. Against the backdrop of these observations, the discussion then turns to the analysis of Classical and Late Latin clause structure. It is proposed that during the transition from Classical to Late Latin, a major parametric change took place related to the way the clausal EPP-requirement is satisfied. In the earlier grammar (‘Grammar A’), the entire VP undergoes A-movement to the high T-domain, resulting in the characteristic VPAux word order. In the later grammar (‘Grammar B’) the EPP-requirement is met by means of verb movement, with the VP staying in situ. In this grammar VPAux-orders are derived through roll-up movement, which is incompatible with the VOAux-pattern.

Motion Verbs in Old Saxon with the Oblique Subject Construction: A Semantic Analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 137 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tonya Kim Dewey ◽  
Carlee Arnett
Keyword(s):  
Semantic Analysis ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Motion Verbs ◽  
Old Saxon ◽  
Interesting Fact ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Dative Subject ◽  
Verbs Of Motion ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Finite Verb

AbstractAn interesting fact about Old Saxon is that certain verbs of motion can occur with a dative pronoun which shows certain properties often considered to be indicative of subject status, making these verbs part of the dative subject construction. The dative marked argument is always animate and usually human. Punctuality and telicity are also often overtly marked in the clause. The dative occurs with verbs of motion in Old Saxon when the participant is salient in the discourse. In some instances, a nominative subject earlier in the discourse can trigger verb agreement, but very often a nominative simply is not present. Additionally, the dative pronoun is in subject position next to the finite verb. Thus the dative with verbs of motion exhibits the subject properties of linear subject position, topicality, animacy, definiteness and discourse salience. Semantic subject properties include volitionality, initiation of action, telicity and punctuality. Our analysis concludes that the dative argument with verbs of motion is related, but not identical, to other non-nominative subjects attested in Old Saxon.

Relative inversion and non-verb-initial imperatives in Early Modern Swedish

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erik Magnusson Petzell
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Additional Assumption ◽  
Structural Difference ◽  
Initial Position ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Subject Positions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Syntactic Differences

This article deals with two syntactic differences between Present-Day Swedish (PDSw) and Early Modern Swedish (EMSw): first, only EMSw allows VS and XVS word order to occur in relative clauses; second, only EMSw permits non-verb-initial imperatives. One structural difference between the varieties is assumed to be a prerequisite for all these word order differences: the subject position was spec-TP in EMSw but is spec-FinP in PDSw. Only the lower position (spec-TP) is compatible with inversion (VS) and fronting of non-subjects (XVS) in relative clauses as well as with imperative clauses having elements other than the imperative verb in the initial position. To be able to account for the latter phenomenon, however, an additional assumption is needed: the imperative type-feature, [imp], always accompanies the verb in PDSw but is tied to an operator in EMSw. The first assumption about differing subject positions is independently motivated by findings already in the previous literature. The second assumption about the differing behaviour of [imp] in the two varieties is supported by the distribution of imperative verbs over a wider range of syntactic contexts in EMSw than in PDSw.

(De)-Focussing and Object Raising in Romanian

1999 ◽  
Vol 44 (01) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriela Alboiu
Keyword(s):  
Word Order ◽  
Movement Analysis ◽  
Binding Interactions ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Nominal Feature

Abstract This article argues that VOS structures in Romanian are derived from a basic VSO word order and, consequently, involve object raising out of VP, across the subject left in situ. Binding interactions and the availability of raising quantified NPs clause-medially provide syntactic support for an A-movement analysis of the raised objects. In contrast to other languages that allow (or require) movement of objects to argumental positions, it is argued that in Romanian VOS structures the object does not move for the purposes of Case checking nor does object raising entail a strong, definite interpretation of the moved NP. Rather, object raising is an instance of de-focussing, made possible by a strong nominal feature on the abstract verb v.

Clause Structure Folding and the “Wh-in-Situ Effect”

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (3) ◽  
pp. 389-411 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Moro
Keyword(s):  
Structural Property ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Comparative Perspective ◽  
Left Periphery ◽  
Clause Structure ◽  
Remnant Movement ◽  
Locality Conditions

Why must a coordinative head show up before an adverbial wh-phrase in situ in Italian? In this article, I explore this rather neglected fact, showing that it reveals an otherwise hidden structure. More specifically, I propose that the coordinative head does not directly merge with the wh-phrase it precedes; rather, it takes a full clausal complement, inducing remnant movement and stranding of the highest wh-phrase. This configuration yields the observed word order and explains many properties of these constructions by means of independent locality conditions. I argue that it is a rescue strategy languages may adopt to meet a structural property of the left periphery, and I address some questions that the comparative perspective raises.

scholarly journals Where to place inaccessible subjects in Dutch: The role of definiteness and animacy

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 369-398
Author(s):  
Jorrig Vogels ◽  
Geertje Van Bergen
Keyword(s):  
Natural Language ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Corpus Study ◽  
Syntactic Variation ◽  
Syntactic Position ◽  
Accessible Information ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Topical Information

AbstractCross-linguistically, both subjects and topical information tend to be placed at the beginning of a sentence. Subjects are generally highly topical, causing both tendencies to converge on the same word order. However, subjects that lack prototypical topic properties may give rise to an incongruence between the preference to start a sentence with the subject and the preference to start a sentence with the most accessible information. We present a corpus study in which we investigate in what syntactic position (preverbal or postverbal) such low-accessible subjects are typically found in Dutch natural language. We examine the effects of both discourse accessibility (definiteness) and inherent accessibility (animacy). Our results show that definiteness and animacy interact in determining subject position in Dutch. Non-referential (bare) subjects are less likely to occur in preverbal position than definite subjects, and this tendency is reinforced when the subject is inanimate. This suggests that these two properties that make the subject less accessible together can ‘gang up’ against the subject first preference. The results support a probabilistic multifactorial account of syntactic variation.

Variation between singular and plural subject-verb agreement in German: A usage-based approach

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juliana Goschler
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Approach ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Systematic Variation ◽  
Subject Position ◽  
Verb Agreement ◽  
Determining Factors ◽  
Proper Name ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Syntactic Properties ◽  
Plural Subject

AbstractAt first glance, subject-verb-agreement seems to be straightforward in German: In the case of simplex NPs, the subject always agrees with the verb syntactically in person and number. However, with coordinated NPs in subject position, there is considerable variation in usage. If both conjuncts are singular NPs, the verb may display singular agreement - as would be expected, since coordinated structures inherit their syntactic properties from their individual components - but much more frequently, the verb displays plural agreement. On the basis of the LIMAS-corpus, a one-million-word corpus of written German, I will show that there is systematic variation between the two options. Among the determining factors are the position of the verb (preceding or following the subject), the type of NP (pronoun, proper name, lexical NP) and the internal syntactic structure of the subject (coordination of full NPs vs. coordination of partial NPs sharing a determiner, and definiteness vs. indefiniteness of the coordinated parts of the subject). I will discuss the results from the perspective of usage-based approaches and argue for an integration of semantic, pragmatic, and frequency factors in any theoretical approach to grammar.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document