No case tampering once transfer domain is formed!
-
Marwan Jarrah
,
Rasheed Al-Jarrah
Abstract
This research article offers empirical evidence from Standard Arabic (SA) that an existing structural case assigned on an element by one head can be overridden by a new structural case assigned by a different head as long as the element (or one of its copies) has not become part of any previous transfer domain defined by the Phase Impenetrability Condition (PIC) (see Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press). Our main evidence comes from the patterns of case assignment of the overt complementizer ʔinna in SA. ʔinna can only assign case to elements that otherwise bear default case, including a topical object or a topical subject as well as elements that are assigned case by T0 such as a contrastively focused subject. On the other hand, ʔinna never assigns case to a contrastively focused object (that is located in CP) which is argued to be base generated in its thematic position within the transfer domain of v*P. These facts are taken together as evidence that a structural case assigned to elements within a phase is temporary (as it can be overridden) until the transfer takes place. We attribute this to the workings of a transfer principle labelled as The Case-Chain Uniformity Principle (CCUP) that demands that a non-trivial chain (i.e., a discontinuous entity) be only assigned one case value in the interface.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank anonymous TLR reviewers for insightful comments and criticisms that enhanced the quality and the representation of the whole paper. All errors and shortcomings are ours.
References
Ahmed, Amer. 2015a. On agreement affixes, incorporated pronouns, and clitics in Standard Arabic. SKY Journal of Linguistics 28. 67–102.Search in Google Scholar
Ahmed, Hossam Eldin Ibrahim. 2015b. Verbal complementizers in Arabic. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Albuhayri, Salem. 2019. Information structure in Standard Arabic verbal sentences. Milwaukee: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, Elabbas Benmamoun & Dominique Sportiche. 1994. Agreement, word order, and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic. Linguistic Inquiry 20. 195–220.Search in Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph. 1979. On government, case-marking, and clitic placement. Ms. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Search in Google Scholar
Aoun, Joseph, Elabbas Benmamoun & Lina Choueiri. 2010. The syntax of Arabic. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511691775Search in Google Scholar
Baker, Mark & Nadya Vinokurova. 2010. Two modalities of case assignment: Case in Sakha. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 28(3). 593–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-010-9105-1.Search in Google Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195119947.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Bejar, Susana & Diana Massam. 1999. Multiple case checking. Syntax 2. 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9612.00015.Search in Google Scholar
Berwick, Robert & Noam Chomsky. 2011. The biolinguistic program: The current state of its development. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo and Cedric Boeckx (eds.), The biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, 19–41. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric. 2012. Phases beyond explanatory adequacy. In Ángel J Gallego (ed.), Phases: Developing the framework, 45–66. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110264104.45Search in Google Scholar
Boeckx, Cedric & Kleanthes K. Grohmann. 2004. Left dislocation in Germanic. In Werner Abraham (ed.), Focus on Germanic typology, 139–152. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.10.1524/9783050084336.139Search in Google Scholar
Brattico, Pauli. 2009. Long-distance case assignment in Finnish and the theory of phases. Biolinguistica Fennica Working Papers 1. 79–104.Search in Google Scholar
Carstens, Vicki. 2003. Rethinking complementizer agreement: Agree with a case-checked goal. Linguistic Inquiry 34. 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438903322247533.Search in Google Scholar
Carstens, Vicki. 2010. Implications of grammatical gender for the theory of uninterpretable features. In Michael Putnam (ed.), Exploring crash-proof grammars, 31–57. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lfab.3.03carSearch in Google Scholar
Carstens, Vicki. 2011. Hyperactivity and hyperagreement in Bantu. Lingua 121(5). 721–741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2010.11.001.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, 89–155. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/4056.003.0004Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2007. Approaching UG from below. In Uli Sauerland & Hans-Martin Gärtner (eds.), Interfaces + recursion = language, 1–29. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110207552-001Search in Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Robert Freidin, Carlos P. Otero & Maria Luisa Zubizarreta (eds.), Foundational issues in linguistic theory, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262062787.003.0007Search in Google Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1990. Types of Ā-dependencies. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Citko, Barbara. 2014. Phase theory: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139644037Search in Google Scholar
Csirmaz, Aniko. 2012. The case of the divisible phase: Licensing partitive case in Finnish. Syntax 15(3). 215–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00170.x.Search in Google Scholar
Fassi-Fehri, Abdulqadir. 1993. Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and word order. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-017-1986-5Search in Google Scholar
Fuß, Eric. 2005. The rise of agreement. Amsterdam: Benjamins.10.1075/la.81Search in Google Scholar
Gallego, Ángel J. 2014. Deriving feature inheritance from the copy theory of movement. The Linguistic Review 31. 41–71.10.1515/tlr-2013-0021Search in Google Scholar
Gerdts, Donna B. & Cheong Youn. 1988. Korean psych constructions: Advancement or retreat? In Lynn MacLeod, Gary Larson & Diane Brentari (eds.), Papers from the 24th Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Part One: The general session, 155–175.Search in Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Marjo Van Koppen. 2012. Complementizer agreement and the relation between C0 and T0. Linguistic Inquiry 43(3). 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00096.Search in Google Scholar
Harbert, Wayne & Maher Bahloul. 2002. Postverbal subjects in Arabic and the theory of agreement. In Ouhalla Jamal & Ur Shlonsky (eds.), Themes in Arabic and Hebrew syntax, 45–70. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-010-0351-3_2Search in Google Scholar
Hiraiwa, Ken. 2005. Dimensions of symmetry in syntax: Agreement and clausal architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Holmberg, Andres. 2005. Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 533–564. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438905774464322.Search in Google Scholar
Ibn Al-Anbari, Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad. 1961. Al-Insaf fi masa’il al-khilaf. Cairo: Alkhanji Library.Search in Google Scholar
Jarrah, Marwan. 2017. A criterial freezing approach to subject extraction in Jordanian Arabic. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics/La Revue Canadienne de Linguistique 62. 411–448. https://doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2017.19.Search in Google Scholar
Jarrah, Marwan. 2019. Record your agree: A case study of the Arabic complementizer ʔinn. Journal of Linguistics 55(1). 83–122. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226718000282.Search in Google Scholar
Jarrah, Marwan. 2020. Complementizer agreement and the T0‐Φ parameter in Jordanian Arabic. Studia Linguistica 74(1). 139–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/stul.12122.Search in Google Scholar
Jarrah, Marwan & Nimer Abusalim. 2021. In favour of the low IP area in the Arabic clause structure: Evidence from the VSO word order in Jordanian Arabic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 39. 123–156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-020-09474-y.Search in Google Scholar
Legate, Julie Anne. 2012. The size of phases. In Angel Jesus Gallego (ed.), Phases: Developing the framework, 233–250. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110264104.233Search in Google Scholar
Levin, Theodore. 2017. Successive-cyclic case assignment: Korean nominative-nominative case-stacking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 35(2). 447–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-016-9342-z.Search in Google Scholar
Massam, Diane. 1985. Case theory and the projection principle. Cambridge: MIT dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
McCreight, Katherine. 1998. Multiple case assignments. MIT, Cambridge, Mass.: PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Miyagawa, Shigero. 2009. Why agree? Why move? Unifying agreement-based and discourse-configurational languages. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.10.7551/mitpress/8116.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Mohammad, Mohammad. 1988. Nominative case, I-subjects and subject-verb agreement. In Diane Brentari, Gary Larson & Lynn MacLeod (eds.), Proceedings of CLS parasession on agreement and grammatical theory, 223–235. Chicago: CLS.Search in Google Scholar
Mohammad, Mohammad. 2000. Word order, agreement and pronominalization in Standard and Palestinian Arabic, 181. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/cilt.181Search in Google Scholar
Moutouakil, Ahmed. 1989. Pragmatic functions in a functional grammar of Arabic. Dordrecht: Foris.10.1515/9783110874181Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Gereon. 2004. Phrase impenetrability and Wh-intervention. In Arthur Stepanov, Fanselow Gisbert & Ralf Vogel (eds.), Minimality effects in syntax, 289–325. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197365.289Search in Google Scholar
Nevins, Andrew. 2004. Derivations without the activity condition. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 49. 287–310.Search in Google Scholar
Ouali, Hamid. 2014. Multiple agreement in Moroccan Arabic. In Karen Froud & Reem Kamis Dakwar (eds.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XXV, 121–134. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/sal.2.08ouaSearch in Google Scholar
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1994. Verb movement and word order in Arabic. In David Lightfoot & Norbert Hornstein (eds.), Verb movement, 41–72. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511627705.004Search in Google Scholar
Ouhalla, Jamal. 1997. Remarks on focus in Standard Arabic. In Mushira Eid & Robert Ratcliffe (eds.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics X: Papers from the Tenth Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, 9–45. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.153.04ouhSearch in Google Scholar
Pesetsky, David & Esther Torrego. 2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian, & Wendy K. Wilkins (eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation, 262–294. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.101.14pesSearch in Google Scholar
Plunkett, Bernadette. 1993. The position of subjects in Modern Standard Arabic. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science Series 4. 231–231. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.101.15plu.Search in Google Scholar
Richards, Marc. 2007. On feature inheritance: An argument from the Phase Impenetrability Condition. Linguistic Inquiry 38. 563–572. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling.2007.38.3.563.Search in Google Scholar
Richards, Marc. 2011. Deriving the edge: What’s in a phase? Syntax 14. 74–95. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00146.x.Search in Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7Search in Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2004. Locality and the left periphery. In Adriana Belletti (ed.), Structure and beyond, 223–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780195171976.003.0008Search in Google Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 2005. On some properties of subjects and topics. In Laura Brugè, Giuliana Giusti, Nicola Munaro, Walter Schweikert & Giuseppina Turano (eds.), Contributions to the XXX Incontro di Grammatica Generativa, 203–224. Venice: Cafoscarina.Search in Google Scholar
Salem, Murad. 2010. Bare nominals, information structure and word order. Lingua 120. 1476–1501. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2009.11.002.Search in Google Scholar
Salzmann, Martin. 2017. Reconstruction and resumption in indirect A′ -dependencies: On the syntax of prolepsis and relativization in (Swiss) German and beyond. Berlin: de Gruyter.10.1515/9781614512202Search in Google Scholar
Samuels, Bridget. 2012. Consequences of phases for morpho–phonology. In H. van Riemsdijk, H. van der Hulst & J. Koster (eds.), Phases, 251–282. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110264104.251Search in Google Scholar
Schütze, Carson. 2001. On Korean “Case Stacking”: The varied functions of the particles ka and lul. The Linguistic Review 18. 193–232.10.1515/tlir.2001.001Search in Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 1992. Resumptive pronouns as a last resort. Linguistic Inquiry 23. 443–468.Search in Google Scholar
Shlonsky, Ur. 2000. Remarks on the complementizer layer of standard Arabic. In Jacqueline Lecarme, Jean Lowenstamm & Ur Shlonsky (eds, Research in Afroasiatic grammar: Papers from the third conference on Afroasiatic languages, 325–343. Amsterdam. Sophia Antipolis.10.1075/cilt.202.15shlSearch in Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. 2012. Minimalist C/case. Linguistic Inquiry 43. 191–227.10.1162/LING_a_00083Search in Google Scholar
Soltan, Usama. 2007. On formal feature licensing in minimalism: Aspects of standard Arabic morphosyntax. College Park: University of Maryland Dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Takano, Yuji. 2003. Nominative objects in Japanese complex predicate constructions: A prolepsis analysis. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 21(4). 779–834.10.1023/A:1025545313178Search in Google Scholar
Thráinsson, Hoskuldur. 1979. On complementation in Icelandic. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Ura, Hiroyuki. 1996. Multiple feature checking and grammatical function splitting. Cambridge, MA: MIT Ph.D. dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Yoon, James Hye-Suk. 1996. Ambiguity of government and the chain condition. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 14. 105–162. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00133404.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- No case tampering once transfer domain is formed!
- A recursive prefix in Neasu
- On a dichotomy of question types: the case of Mandarin Chinese and Changsha Xiang
- “Adverbs and functional heads” twenty years later: cartographic methodology, verb raising and macro/micro-variation
- Corrigendum
- Corrigendum to: Split noun phrase topicalization in Eshkevarat Gilaki
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Articles
- No case tampering once transfer domain is formed!
- A recursive prefix in Neasu
- On a dichotomy of question types: the case of Mandarin Chinese and Changsha Xiang
- “Adverbs and functional heads” twenty years later: cartographic methodology, verb raising and macro/micro-variation
- Corrigendum
- Corrigendum to: Split noun phrase topicalization in Eshkevarat Gilaki
