Interaction of Demonstratives With Nominal Spine in Haili Arabic

Eisa Sneitan Alrasheedi

Abstract


This research addresses the syntactic behaviour and distribution of demonstratives in Haili Arabic, less-investigated Arabic variety. It precisely looks at how demonstratives interact with other DP components. To this end, the recent advancements of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995 and subsequent work) are adopted. Following the cross-linguistic assumption that demonstratives are heads of a dedicated projection, DemP, the study argues that demonstratives in Haili Arabic are endowed with a set of uninterpretable Φ-features. Demonstratives function as a probe, and the head noun is the goal valuing their Φ-features. A by-product of this value is the morphological form of the given demonstrative. As for base-generation of demonstratives, I proposed two accounts. The first one maintains that there is only one projection hosting demonstratives. Thus, when demonstratives appear at the end of the DP, the head noun, lower Dº, and any accompanying nominal modifiers move to the spec of DemP. The second account is that there are two DemP’s per a single DP, where only one can host the demonstrative at a time.


Keywords


Demonstratives; Phrasal movement; Uninterpretable features; Valuation

Full Text:

PDF

References


Adger, D., & Svenonius, P. (2011). Features in minimalist syntax. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Minimalism, 27-51.

Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2004). Evidentiality. Oxford University Press.

Al-Jarrah, R. S., Abu Dalu, A. M., & Jarrah, M. (2015). A relevance–theoretical account of three Arabic pragmatic operators of concession in a political discourse. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 11(1), 51-76.

Alhaisoni, E., Jarrah, M. A., & Shehadeh, M. S. (2012). An investigation of evidentiality in the Arabic language. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 260-273.

Alrasheedi, E. S. (2015). Affrication in Ha’ili Arabic: A rule-based approach. International Journal of Linguistics, 7(4), 27-41.

Alshamari, M. R. (2015). Pragmatic analysis of the particle ʁadɪ in Najdi Arabic. International Journal of Linguistics, 7(2), 81-93.

Bernstein, J. B. (1997). Demonstratives and reinforcers in Romance and Germanic languages. Lingua, 102(2), 87-113.

Brugè, L. (2002). The positions of demonstratives in the extended nominal projection. Functional Structure in DP and IP: The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, 1, 15-53.

Cardinaletti, A., & Shlonsky, U. (2004). Clitic positions and restructuring in Italian. Linguistic Inquiry, 35(4), 519-557.

Cinque, G. (Ed.). (2002). Functional structure in DP and IP: The cartography of syntactic structures (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.

Cinque, G. (2003). On Greenberg’s universal 20 and the Semitic DP. In L.-O. Delsing, C. Falk, G. Josefsson, & H. Sigurðsson, (Eds.), Grammatik i fokus: Festskrift till Christer Platzack den 18 November 2003 (Vol II, pp.243-251). Lund: Wallin & Dalholm.

Cinque, G. (2005). Deriving Greenberg’s universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(3), 315-332.

Coene, M. (Ed.). (2003). From NP to DP: The syntax and semantics of noun phrases (Vol.1). John Benjamins Publishing.

Chomsky, N. (1993). A minimalist program for linguistic theory. In K. Keyser (Ed.) The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger (pp.1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In H. Lasnik, R. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka (Eds.), Step by step. Essays on minimalist syntax in honour of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge. Mass: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale. A Life in language (pp.1-52). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2004). Beyond explanatory adequacy. In Belletti, A. (Ed.), Structures and beyond, the cartography of syntactic structures (pp.104-131). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chomsky, N. (2005). On phases. Ms. MIT.

Chomsky, N. (2007). Approaching UG from below. In U. Sauerland, & H. Gärtner (Eds.) Interfaces+ recursion= language?: Chomsky’s minimalism and the view from syntax-semantics (pp.1-30). Walter de Gruyter.

Elbourne, P. (2008). Demonstratives as individual concepts. Linguistics and Philosophy, 31(4), 409-466.

Guardiano, C. (2012). Demonstratives, word order and the DP between syntax and semantics: Crosslinguistic remarks. Studies in Greek Linguistics, 32, 100-115.

Johnson, K., & Lepore, E. (2002). Does syntax reveal semantics? A case study of complex demonstratives. Noûs, 36(S16), 17-41.

Kayne, R. (2008). Expletives, datives, and the tension between morphology and syntax. The Limits of Syntactic Variation, 175-217.

Laenzlinger, C. (2005). French adjective ordering: Perspectives on DP-internal movement types. Lingua, 115(5), 645-689.

Lyons, C. (1999). Definiteness. Cambridge University Press.

Roberts, C. (2002). Demonstratives as definites. Information Sharing: Reference and Presupposition in Language Generation and Interpretation, 89-196.

Roehrs, D. (2009). Demonstratives and definite articles as nominal auxiliaries (Vol.140). John Benjamins

Publishing.

Sichel, I. (2000). Evidence for DP-internal remnant movement. In M. Hirotani, A. Coetzee, N. Hall, J.-Y. Kim (Eds.), Proceedings of the North East linguistic society 30. Rutgers

University, New Brunswick, NJ, pp.568Ð581.

Shlonsky, U. (2004). The form of Semitic noun phrases. Lingua, 114(12), 1465-1526.

Shlonsky, U. (2012). On some properties of nominals in Hebrew and Arabic, the construct state and the mechanisms of AGREE and MOVE. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 24, 267-286.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (2nd ed., 1995). Oxford: Blackwell.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1987). Presumptions of relevance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 736-53.

Heck, R. (2002). Do demonstratives have senses? Philosophers’ Imprint, 2(2), 1-33.

Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1998). The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. In P. Carruthers, & J. Boucher (Eds.), Language and Thought: Interdisciplinary Themes (184-200). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3968/7934

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2016 Studies in Literature and Language




Share us to:   


Reminder

How to do online submission to another Journal?

If you have already registered in Journal A, then how can you submit another article to Journal B? It takes two steps to make it happen:

1. Register yourself in Journal B as an Author

Find the journal you want to submit to in CATEGORIES, click on “VIEW JOURNAL”, “Online Submissions”, “GO TO LOGIN” and “Edit My Profile”. Check “Author” on the “Edit Profile” page, then “Save”.

2. Submission

Go to “User Home”, and click on “Author” under the name of Journal B. You may start a New Submission by clicking on “CLICK HERE”.


We only use three mailboxes as follows to deal with issues about paper acceptance, payment and submission of electronic versions of our journals to databases: caooc@hotmail.com; sll@cscanada.net; sll@cscanada.org

 Articles published in Studies in Literature and Language are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

 STUDIES IN LITERATURE AND LANGUAGE Editorial Office

Address: 1020 Bouvier Street, Suite 400, Quebec City, Quebec, G2K 0K9, Canada. 
Telephone: 1-514-558 6138 
Website: Http://www.cscanada.net; Http://www.cscanada.org 
E-mailoffice@cscanada.net; office@cscanada.org; caooc@hotmail.com

Copyright © 2010 Canadian Academy of Oriental and Occidental Culture