Cover not available
Part of
Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXVII: Papers from the Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Bloomington, Indiana, 2013
Edited by Stuart Davis and Usama Soltan
[Studies in Arabic Linguistics 3] 2016
► pp. 59–74

Verbal and nominal plurals and the syntaxmorphology interface

| University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

One of the assumptions of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky, 1995, and subsequent work within the program) is the idea that (narrow) syntactic derivations are driven by the interaction between formal features. However, one key aspect of formal features that drives their syntactic activity is the lack of interpretability. Thus, non-interpretable agreement features on temporal and verbal heads must be paired with interpretable matching features on nominal elements such as subjects and objects. There is compelling morpho-phonological evidence from Arabic that this dichotomy is plausible and has far reaching consequences for the syntax-morphology interface. The critical argument comes from cases of nominal and verbal plurals where the plural feature is spelled-out differently depending on whether it is interpretable or non-interpretable on its immediate host.

Keywords: Arabic, nominal plurals, syntax-morphology interface, Verbal plurals
Published online: 26 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/sal.3.03ben
References
Aoun, J., Benmamoun, E., & Sportiche, D
(1994) Agreement and conjunction in some varieties of Arabic. Linguistic Inquiry, 25, 195–220.Google Scholar
Aoun, J., & Benmamoun, E
(1999) Gapping, PF merger, and patterns of partial agreement. In S. Lappin & E. Benmamoun (Eds.), Fragments: Studies in ellipsis and gapping (pp. 175-192). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aoun, J., Benmamoun, E., & Choueiri, L
(2010) Arabic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Arad, M
(2005) Roots and patterns: Hebrew morphosyntax. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Bat-El, O
(1994) Stem modification and cluster transfer in Modern Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 12, 571-596. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E
(1999) Arabic morphology: The central role of the imperfective. Lingua, 108, 175–201. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000) The Feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2003) Reciprocals as plurals in Arabic. In Lecarme, J., J. Lowenstamm, and U. Shlonsky (Eds.), Studies in Afroasiatic grammar (pp. 53-62). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E., Bhatia, A. & Polinsky, M
(2009) Closest conjunct agreement in head final languages. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 9, 67–88. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benmamoun, E., Abunasser, M., Al-Sabbagh, R., Bidaoui, A., & Shalash, D
(2014) The location of sentential negation in Arabic varieties. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics, 5, 83-116 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bobaljik, J
(2008) Where’s phi? agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In D. Harbour, D. Adger & S. Béjar (Eds.), Phi-theory: Phi features across interfaces and modules (pp. 295–328). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W
(2001) Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon. Cognition, 81, 65–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N
(1995) The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Collins, C
(2001) Aspects of plurality in ¹Hoan. Language, 77, 456-576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durie, M
(1986) The grammaticalization of number as a verbal category. In Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistic Society , 335-369.
Fassi Fehri, A
(1993) Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and words. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J
(1991) The Semitic "intensive" as verbal plurality. In Alan S. Kaye (Ed.), Semitic studies In honor of Wolf Leslau (pp. 577-587). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Halle, M. & Marantz, A
(1993) Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In K. Hale & S.J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20 (pp. 111-176). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Idrissi, A., Prunet, J., & Béland, R
(2008) On the mental representation of Arabic roots. Linguistic Inquiry, 39(2), 221–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorimor, H
(2007) Conjunctions and grammatical agreement. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Illinois.Google Scholar
Marantz, A
(1997) No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In A. Dimitriadis, L. Siegel, C. Surek-Clark, and A. Williams (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium (pp. 201–225), University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
McCarthy, J
(1979) Formal Problems in Semitic phonology and morphology. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
(1993) Templatic form in prosodic morphology. In Proceedings of FLSM III. In Laurel Smith Stvan et al. (Eds.), Papers from the Third Annual Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America Conference (pp. 187-218), Indiana University.
McCarthy, J. & Prince, A
(1990) Foot and word in prosodic morphology: The Arabic broken plural. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 8, 209-283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mithun, M
(1988) Lexical Categories and the Evolution of Number Marking. In M. Hammond and M. Noonan (Eds.), Theoretical Morphology (pp. 211-234). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Moutaouakil, A
(1988) Qadaayaa Mu’jamiyya. Rabat, Morocco: Al-Maarif Al-JadiidaGoogle Scholar
Pesetsky, D., & Torrego, E
(2007) The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. In S. Karimi, V. Samiian & W. Wilkins (Eds.), Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation (pp. 262-294). Amsterdam: John Benjmains. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pinker, T
(1999) Words and rules. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Preminger, O
(2011) Agreement as a fallible operation. Doctoral dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Prunet, J., Béland, R. & Idrissi, A
(2000) The mental representation of Semitic words. Linguistic Inquiry, 31, 609–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ratcliffe, R
(1997) Prosodic templates in a word-based morphological analysis of Arabic. In M. Eid & R. Ratcliffe (Eds.) Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics X, (pp. 147–171). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soltan, U
(2007) On Formal feature licensing in minimalism: Aspects of Standard Arabic morphosyntax. Ph.D dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
Ussishkin, A
1999 The inadequacy of the consonantal root: Modern Hebrew denominal verbs and output-output correspondence. Phonology, 16, 401-442 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, J
(2002) The phonology and morphology of Arabic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Davis, Stuart
2019. Are there transfer effects in the Arabic comparative?. In Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXX [Studies in Arabic Linguistics, 7], ► pp. 33 ff. DOI logo
Davis, Stuart & Natsuko Tsujimura
2018. Arabic Nonconcatenative Morphology in Construction Morphology. In The Construction of Words [Studies in Morphology, 4], ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
E. Watson, Janet C.
2021. Arabic Morphology. In The Cambridge Handbook of Arabic Linguistics, ► pp. 405 ff. DOI logo
Karin Ryding & David Wilmsen
2021. The Cambridge Handbook of Arabic Linguistics, DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.