Home A different kind of phrasal comparatives with a non-transformational Schönfinkelization in semantic composition: the case of Jordanian Arabic
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

A different kind of phrasal comparatives with a non-transformational Schönfinkelization in semantic composition: the case of Jordanian Arabic

  • Abdel-Rahman Abu Helal EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: October 30, 2024

Abstract

Cross-linguistically, phrasal comparatives have been shown to vary with respect to the categorical status and denotational meaning of their standard of comparison (i.e., the NP constituent following the ‘than’ particle): whether the standard of comparison in phrasal comparatives is to be categorized as a superficially individual-denoting nominal expression or it is to be interpreted as an underlyingly degree-denoting reduced clause that undergoes deletion in the syntax. This paper argues that Jordanian Arabic (JA) is a language which makes use of phrasal comparatives with no clausal source in the standard of comparison. The paper further shows that the comparative head (i.e., the –er morpheme) in JA phrasal comparatives requires a special instance of Schönfinkelization of the comparative operator which relates individual-denoting objects with no transformations in the syntax-semantics interface.


Corresponding author: Abdel-Rahman Abu Helal, Department of English Language and Literature, Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan, E-mail:

References

Abney, Steven. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Abu Helal, Abdel-Rahman. 2021. Definite description of episodic free relatives in Jordanian Arabic: A choice function analysis. Lingua 258(2021). 103096. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103096.Search in Google Scholar

Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. 2017. Structural ambiguity and case assignment in Hungarian clausal and phrasal comparatives. Approaches to Hungarian 15. 35–63.10.1075/atoh.15.02bacSearch in Google Scholar

Barker, Chris. 2007. Parasitic scope. Linguistics and Philosophy 30(3). 407–444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-007-9021-y.Search in Google Scholar

Beck, Sigrid & Uli Sauerland. 2000. Cumulativity is needed: A reply to Winter (2000). Natural Language Semantics 8. 349–371. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1011240827230.10.1023/A:1011240827230Search in Google Scholar

Beck, Sigrid, Toshiko Oda & Koji Sugisaki. 2004. Parametric variation in the semantics of comparison: Japanese vs. English. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 13(4). 289–344. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-004-1289-0.Search in Google Scholar

Beck, Sigrid, Sveta Krasikova, Daniel Fleischer, Remus Gergel, Stefan Hofstetter, Christiane Savelsberg, John Vanderelst & Elisabeth Villalta. 2009. Crosslinguistic variation in comparison constructions. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 9(1). 1–66. https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.9.01bec.Search in Google Scholar

Beck, Sigrid, Hohaus Vera & Sonja Tiemann. 2012. A note on phrasal comparatives. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 22. 2012.10.3765/salt.v22i0.2654Search in Google Scholar

Berezovskaya, Polina. 2020. Comparing comparatives: New perspectives from fieldwork and processing. 2020. PhD Thesis. Universität Tübingen.Search in Google Scholar

Berezovskaya, Polina & Vera Hohaus. 2015. The crosslinguistic inventory of phrasal comparative operators: Evidence from Russian. In Proceedings of FASL, 1–19‏.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh & Roumyana Pancheva. 2004. Late merger of degree clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 35(1). 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438904322793338.Search in Google Scholar

Bhatt, Rajesh & Shoichi Takahashi. 2011. Reduced and unreduced phrasal comparatives. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 29. 581–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-011-9137-1.Search in Google Scholar

Bochnak, M. Ryan. 2010. Quantity and gradability across categories. Proceedings of SALT 20. 251–268.10.3765/salt.v20i0.2570Search in Google Scholar

Bochnak, M. Ryan. 2015. The degree semantics parameter and cross-linguistic variation. Semantics and Pragmatics 8. 6–1. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.8.6.Search in Google Scholar

Chung, Sandra & Ladusaw A. William. 2004. Restriction and saturation (Linguistic Inquiry Monographs; 42). Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Condoravdi, Cleo. 2005. Not knowing or caring who. Paper presented at the MIT/Harvard LSA Summer Institute.Search in Google Scholar

Von Fintel, Kai. 2000. Whatever. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 10. 27. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v10i0.3101.Search in Google Scholar

Fox, Danny. 2002. Antecedent-contained deletion and the copy theory of movement. Linguistic Inquiry 33. 63–96. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438902317382189.Search in Google Scholar

Fox, Danny & Jon Nissenbaum. 1999. Extraposition and scope: A case for overt QR2. In Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on formal linguistics, vol. 18.Search in Google Scholar

Grano, Thomas & Stuart Davis. 2018. Universal markedness in gradable adjectives revisited: The morpho-semantics of the positive form in Arabic 3. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 36(1). 131–147.10.1007/s11049-017-9365-0Search in Google Scholar

Hallman, Peter. 2016. Superlatives in Syrian Arabic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 34. 1281–1328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-016-9332-1.Search in Google Scholar

Hankamer, Jorge. 1973. Why there are two than’s in English. In Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, vol. 9. No. 1. Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Heim, Irene. 1985. Notes on comparatives and related matters. Ms. Austin: University of Texas.Search in Google Scholar

Heim, Irene. 2001. Degree operators and scope. Semantics and Linguistic Theory 10. 40. https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v10i0.3102.Search in Google Scholar

Heim, Irene & Angelica Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 1997. Projecting the adjective. The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. PhD dissertation, UC Santa Cruz.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 1999. Projecting the adjective: The syntax and semantics of gradability and comparison. Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics Series. New York: Garland Press.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 2009. Modes of comparison. In Malcolm Elliott, James Kirby, Osamu Sawada, Eleni Staraki & Suwon Yoon (eds.), Papers from the 43rd regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 141–165. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Kennedy, Christopher. 2007. Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30. 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-006-9008-0.Search in Google Scholar

Klein, Ewan. 1980. A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4. 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00351812.Search in Google Scholar

Lechner, Winfried. 2004. Ellipsis in comparatives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197402Search in Google Scholar

McNabb, Yaron & Christopher Kennedy. 2011. Extraction and deletion in Palestinian Arabic comparatives. In Ellen Broselow & Hamid Ouali (eds.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXII-XXIII, 149–165. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/cilt.317.07mcnSearch in Google Scholar

Merchant, Jason. 2009. Phrasal and clausal comparatives in Greek and the abstractness of syntax. Journal of Greek Linguistics 9. 134–164. https://doi.org/10.1163/156658409x12500896406005.Search in Google Scholar

Nissenbaum, Jon. 1998. Movement and derived predicates: Evidence from parasitic gaps. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 25. 247–295.Search in Google Scholar

Van Rooij, Robert. 2011. Implicit versus explicit comparatives. In Paul Egré & Nathan Klinedinst (eds.), Vagueness and language use, 51–72. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.10.1057/9780230299313_3Search in Google Scholar

Sag, Ivan A. 1976. Deletion and logical form. Diss. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar

Takahashi, Shoichi & Sarah Hulsey. 2009. Wholesale late merger: Beyond the A/Ā distinction. Linguistic Inquiry 40(3). 387–426. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2009.40.3.387.Search in Google Scholar

von Fintel, Kai & Lisa Matthewson. 2008. Universals in semantics. The Linguistic Review 25(1–2). 139–201.10.1515/TLIR.2008.004Search in Google Scholar

von Stechow, Arnim. 1984. Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3(1–2). 1–77.10.1093/jos/3.1-2.1Search in Google Scholar

Williams, Edwin Samuel. 1974. Rule ordering in syntax. Diss. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2024-01-10
Accepted: 2024-09-22
Published Online: 2024-10-30
Published in Print: 2024-11-26

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 6.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/psicl-2024-0005/html
Scroll to top button