Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-grvzd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-20T20:48:50.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the D-linked character of genitive interrogatives in Iraqi Arabic

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 January 2016

Laura Andreea Sterian
Laura Andreea Sterian*
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper focuses on genitive interrogatives in Iraqi Arabic. I argue that these constructions are inherently D-linked (Discourse-Linked). Similarly to D-linked interrogatives, when genitive interrogatives appear in content questions in which both the resumptive strategy and the gap strategy are possible, the genitive interrogatives have a D-N structure when the gap strategy is employed and a D-φ-N structure when the resumptive strategy is employed. I then propose the following hypothesis: what defines D-linking is the presence of a domain restriction in the form of an overt noun.

Résumé

Résumé

Cet article a pour objet d'étudier les propositions interrogatives génitives en arabe iraquien. Je propose que ces constructions sont intrinsèquement D-linked (liées au discours). Selon le modèle des propositions interrogatives D-linked, lorsque les interrogatives genitives apparaissent dans des questions partielles dans lesquelles la stratégic non-résomptive et la strategic non-resomptive sont possibles, les interrogatives génitives sont caractérisées par une structure D-N si la strategic non-resomptive est employee mais par une structure D-φ-N si la stratégic resomptive est utilisee. Je propose alors l'hypothese selon laquelle c'est la presence d'une restriction de domaine sous la forme d'un nom visible qui définit la notion de D-linking.

Keywords

resumptionwh-movementD-linkingpronounscliticsrésomptiondéplacement-quD-linkingpronomsclitiques

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique , Volume 59 , Issue 2 , July 2014 , pp. 201 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Linguistic Association. 2015

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad. 2003. Context-sensitive spell-out. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21:651–685.Google Scholar
Ackema, Peter and Neeleman, Ad. 2012. Agreement weakening at PF: A reply to Benmamoun and Lorimor. Linguistic Inquiry 43:75–96.Google Scholar
Adger, David and Ramchand, Gillian. 2001. Phases and interpretability. In Proceedings of the 20th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), ed. Magerdoomian, Karine and Bar-el, Leora Anne, 1-14. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Adger, David and Ramchand, Gillian. 2005. Merge and Move: Wh-dependencies revisited. Linguistic Inquiry 36:158–193.Google Scholar
Alexopoulou, Theodora and Keller, Frank. 2003. Linguistic complexity, locality and resumption. In Proceedings of the 22nd West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL), ed. Garding, Gina and Tsujimura, Mimu, 15-28. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Alkalesi, Yasin M. 2006. Modern Iraqi Arabic with MP3 files. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph and Choueiri, Lina. 1999. Modes of interrogation. Ms., University of Southern California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph and Li, Audrey. 2003. Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, Choueiri, Lina, and Hornstein, Norbert. 2001. Resumption, movement and derivational economy. Linguistic Inquiry 32:37l–403.Google Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas and Lorimor, Heidi. 2006. Featureless expressions: When morphophono-logical markers are absent. Linguistic Inquiry 37:1–23.Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2003. Islands and chains: Resumption as stranding. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1984. Restrictive relatives in Modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 2:219–257.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 1999. Deconstructing the construct. In Beyond principles and parameters, ed. Johnson, Kyle and Roberts, Ian, 43–89. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Brustad, Kristen E. 2000. The syntax of spoken Arabic: A comprehensive study of Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian and Kuwaiti dialects. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Cardinaletti, Anna and Starke, Michal. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, ed. van Riemsdijk, Henk, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1968. Conditions on transformations. In A Festschrift for Morris Halle, ed. Anderson, Stephen and Kiparsky, Paul, 232–286. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. Bare phrase structure. In Evolution and revolution in linguistic theory, ed. Campos, Hector and Kempchinsky, Paula, 51–109. Washington, DC: Georgetown University 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, 89–153. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Interfaces + recursion = language?, ed. Sauerland, Uli and Gärtner, Hans-Martin, 1–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Déchaine, Rose-Marie and Wiltschko, Martina. 2002. Decomposing pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 33:409–442.Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida. 1991. Resumptive chains in restrictive relatives, appositives and dislocation structures. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida and Percus, Orin. 2008. When is a pronoun not a pronoun? The case of resumptives. In Proceedings of the 38thth Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Linguistic Society, ed. Schardl, Anisa, Walkow, Martin, and Abdurrahman, Muhammad, 231–245. Chicago: Graduate Linguistic Student Association (GLSA).Google Scholar
Demirdache, Hamida and Percus, Orin. 2011. Resumptives, movement and interpretation. In Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces, ed. Rouveret, Alain, 364–394. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Elbourne, Paul. 2002. E-Type anaphora as NP-deletion. The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Erteschick-Shir, Nomi. 1992. Resumptive pronouns in islands. In Island constraints: Theory, acquisition and processing, vol. 15, Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, ed. Goodluck, Helen and Rochemont, Michael, 89–108. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Evans, Gareth. 1980. Pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 11:337–359.Google Scholar
Fassi Fehri, Abdelkader. 1988. Case inflection, VS order and X’-Theory. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference of the Linguistic Society of Morocco, ed. Fehri, Abdelkader Fassi, unpaginated. Rabat: Oukad.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas. 2006. La reconstruction à l’interface entre syntaxe et sémantique. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Nantes.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas. 2008. To reconstruct or not to reconstruct: That is the question. In Proceedings of the Workshop on What Syntax Feeds Semantics, ed. Romero, Maribel, 25–35. A Association for Logic, Language and Information (FoLLI) publication of the 20th European Summer School in Logic, Language, and Information (ESSLLI). Available at: ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/romero/esslli/synsem-proceedings-v7.pdf.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas and Malkawi, Nouman. 2006. When resumption determines reconstruction. In Proceedings of West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL)25, ed. Baumer, Donald, Montero, David, and Scanlon, Michael, 165–176. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas and Malkawi, Nouman. 2009. When movement fails to reconstruct. In Merging features, ed. Brucart, José M., Gavarró, Anna, and Solà, Jaume, 156–169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guilliot, Nicolas and Malkawi, Nouman. 2011. Clitic versus strong resumption: Covarying differently. In Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces, ed. Rouveret, Alain, 395–424. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Haywood, John A. and Nahmad, H.M.. 1990. A new Arabic grammar of the written language. Lund: Humphries.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert and Nunes, Jairo. 2008. Adjunction, labelling and bare phrase structure. Biolinguistics 2:54–86.Google Scholar
Hornstein, Norbert, Nunes, Jairo, and Grohmann, Kleanthes K.. 2006. Understanding Minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malkawi, Nouman. 2009. Sur la syntaxe de quelques expressions anaphoriques: Epithètes et pronoms résomptifs. Doctoral dissertation, Université de Nantes.Google Scholar
McCloskey, James. 1990. Resumptive pronouns, Ā-binding and levels of representation in Irish. In The syntax of the modern Celtic languages, ed. Hendrick, Randall, 199–248. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Owens, Jonathan, Dodsworth, Robin, and Rockwood, Trent. 2009. Subject-verb order in spoken Arabic: Morpholexical and event-based factors. Language Variation and Change 21:39–64.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 1987. Wh-in-situ: Movement and unselective binding. In The representation of (in)definiteness, ed. Reuland, Eric J. and ter Meulen, Alice G.B., 98–129. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David. 2000. Phrasal movement and its kin. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. 1983. Coreference and bound anaphora: A restatement of the anaphora questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 6:47–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth. 1988a. A case study in the syntax of agreement: Hebrew noun phrases and Benoni verb phrase. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Ritter, Elizabeth. 1988b. A head movement approach to construct state noun phrases. Linguistics 26:909–929.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. 2010. Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation and defective goals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2002. How are resumptive pronouns linked to the periphery? In Linguistic variation yearbook, vol. 2, ed. Pica, Pierre, 123–184. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2008. Phasal agreement and reconstruction. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory, ed. Freidin, Robert, Otero, Carlos P., and Zubizarreta, Maria Luisa, 164–195. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rouveret, Alain. 2011. Resumptive pronouns at the interfaces. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Salem, Murad. 2010. Bare nominals, information structure and word order. Lingua 120:1476–1501.Google Scholar
Sells, Peter. 1984. Syntax and semantics of resumptive pronouns. Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Sharvit, Yael. 1999. Resumptive pronouns in relative clauses. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17:557–582.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1992. Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 23:443–465.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1997. Clause structure and word order in Hebrew and Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2004. Enclisis and proclisis. In The structure of CP and IP, ed. Rizzi, Luigi, 329–351. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterian, Laura-Andreea. 2011. The syntax and semantics of gap and resumptive strategies in Iraqi Arabic D-linked content questions. Master’s thesis, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Sterian, Laura-Andreea. 2014. Pronominal resumption in Baghdadi Arabic: A case for Movement. In Romano-Arabica XIV, ed. Grigore, George and Sitaru, Laura, 319–336. Bucharest: Editura Universitǎtii Bucureşti.Google Scholar
Tsimpli, lanthi Maria. 1999. Null operators, clitics and identification: A comparison between Greek and English. In Studies in Greek syntax, ed. Alexiadou, Artemis, Hor-rocks, Geoffrey, and Stavrou, Melita, 241–259. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Wojdak, Rachel. 2005. The linearization of affixes: Evidence from Nuu-chah-nulth. Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Wright, William. 1996. A grammar of the Arabic language. Beirut: Librairie du Liban.Google Scholar