UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Subject extraction from embedded clauses in standard Arabic Elesseily, Nagat Hassan 1985

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1985_A8 E44.pdf [ 2.05MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0096473.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0096473-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0096473-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0096473-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0096473-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0096473-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0096473-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0096473-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0096473.ris

Full Text

SUBJECT EXTRACTION FROM EMBEDDED  CLAUSES IN STANDARD ARABIC  by NAGAT H.  ELESSEILY  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTERS OF ARTS  in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE  STUDIES  DEPARTMENT OF LINGUSITICS We accept  this  t h e s i s as conforming  to the r e q u i r e d  standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA OCTOBER 1985  ©  NAGAT H.  E L E S S E I L Y , 1985  In  presenting  requirements  this  thesis  in  that  available  permission  scholarly  purposes or  understood  that gain  the  for reference  for extensive  Department  financial  fulfilment  of  the  f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e THE UNIVERSITY OF  BRITISH COLUMBIA, I a g r e e t h a t freely  partial  by  may his  be or  copying  shall  not  and s t u d y .  this  granted  by  the  her  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , Canada V6T 1W5  Head  i t  agree  thesis  representatives.  allowed  make  I further  of  or p u b l i c a t i o n be  shall  copying  permission.  D a t e : OCTOBER 1985  Library  of It  for my is  of t h i s t h e s i s f o r  without  my  written  Abstract Standard Arabic e x h i b i t s 'that t r a c e ' e f f e c t  in one  instance i n the e x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an  'anna'  c l a u s e while the e x t r a c t i o n of the object and an  'an' c l a u s e may  WH-question. c l a u s e may  The  formation  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of an  on the complementizer  appears in place of the moved NP  renders  i n the  'anna'  'anna'. in an  'an'  If the clause i t  the sentence ungrammatical.  The  adoption  of the Government and  Chomsky (1981), (1982) and Government theory and  B i n d i n g Framework,  in p a r t i c u l a r Case Theory,  the Empty Category P r i n c i p l e  enable us to e x p l a i n t h i s d i s t i n c t behavior e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of an the appearance of the c l i t i c analysis.  (ECP)  i n the  'anna' c l a u s e and  show that  i s p r e d i c t e d by the proposed  I t i s argued that the c l i t i c  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of an  appears i n the  'anna' c l a u s e  i n order  to  p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e l e f t by the e x t r a c t e d s u b j e c t , so as not to v i o l a t e ECP. in  SA,  apply  Since verbs are proper  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of an from a governed p o s i t i o n .  what our a n a l y s i s p r e d i c t s . a s s i g n e r and  'an'  Since  'an'  governors  i s exactly  i s not a case  since we are assuming that government and  o b l i g a t o r y i n an Therefore  and  c l a u s e must  In f a c t t h i s  are assigned only to the r i g h t , AGR  NP.  of  not be e x t r a c t e d unless the e x t r a c t e d p o s i t i o n i s  marked by a c l i t i c clitic  be e x c t r a c t e d f r e e l y  the subject of  and verb p r e p o s i n g  'an' c l a u s e to a s s i g n case to the  case are  subject  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject l e a v e s a t r a c e  p r o p e r l y governed by the verb. subject of an  'anna' c l a u s e on the other  i s a case a s s i g n e r and s u b j e c t , AGR  In the e x t r a c t i o n of  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject  may  not apply.  Thus, the  leaves a t r a c e which i s not  p r o p e r l y governed in v i o l a t i o n of ECP,  movement.  'anna'  a s s i g n s a c u s a t i v e case to i t s  and verb preposing  appear in order  hand, s i n c e  the  and  the c l i t i c  to p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e l e f t  by  must  Acknowledgments: My support  s i n c e r e s t t h a n k s t o my and encouragment  complete Rochemont  this  t o my  family  T h e i r moral in helping advisor,  committee David  whose comments I b e n e f i t e d  t o t h a n k my  unfailing  invaluable  Thanks a l s o  and t h e r e s t of my  Hanna K a s s i s want  thesis.  were  collegues.  for their  support.  iv  Michael  Ingram and  greatly.  patience  me  and  Finally,  their  I  Tabl e of I. II.  ///.  IV.  V.  Cont e nt s  INTRODUCTION  /  AN OVERVIEW OF THE GB FRAMEWORK  4  A.  THE GB FRAMEWORK  4  1.  THE RULE SYSTEM  5  2.  THE SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES  7  WORD-ORDER AND CASE ASSIGNMENT  18  A.  VSO ANALYSIS  18  B.  AN ALTERNATIVE  PRO-DROP  ANALYSIS  PHENOMENA AND CLITICS.  A.  PRO-DROP  B.  CLITICS  ANALYSIS  19 27 28 29  WH-EXTRACT ION  42  A.  THE PROBLEM  42  B.  THE SOLUTION  44  CONCLUSION  54  BIBLIOGRAPHY  56  INDEX  59  v  I.  INTRODUCTION  T h i s t h e s i s i s a study of WH-extraction from embedded c l a u s e s i n Standard A r a b i c explained  i s the behavior  (SA)..  observed i n the e x t r a c t i o n of  s u b j e c t s from embedded c l a u s e s 'an' complementizers.  introduced by the 'anna' and  If the subject i s e x t r a c t e d from an  'anna' c l a u s e , a c l i t i c element.  The problem to be  must appear  i n place of the moved  T h i s i s not the case when the embedded c l a u s e i s  introduced by an 'an' complementizer. present  A clitic  i n place of the moved noun phrase.  Our, goal i s to show that the adoption introduced 1981,  of p r i n c i p l e s  i n the Government and Binding Framework (Chomsky,  1982), enable us to e x p l a i n WH-extraction  uniform  can not be  and n a t u r a l manner.  i n SA i n a  The s p e c i f i c p r i n c i p l e s  needed  are Government and Proper Government, the Empty Category Principle clitic  (ECP) the Case Theory.  I t w i l l be argued that a  appears i n an 'anna' c l a u s e i n order to p r o p e r l y  govern the t r a c e l e f t by the moved element.  The e x t r a c t i o n  of an element that i s not p r o p e r l y governed would be i n v i o l a t i o n of the ECP.  Furthermore, the f a c t that the  appears i n an 'anna' c l a u s e and not i n an 'an' c l a u s e  clitic leads  us to assume that the s u b j e c t i n 'an' c l a u s e i s p r o p e r l y governed. in SA  Since only verbs and c l i t i c s are proper governors  (as w i l l be shown), the e x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t of  an 'an' c l a u s e must have a p p l i e d from a governed position.  VSO,  in fact,  'an' comlementizer.  i s the word-order  r e q u i r e d by an  T h i s word order e x p l a i n s why 1  post-verbal  the  clitic  2  i s not  r e q u i r e d in t h i s case,  p r o p e r l y governed by the The  s i n c e the t r a c e w i l l  verb.  p r e s e n t a t i o n of the arguments f o r the above  analysis w i l l the p r e s e n t  be d i v i d e d i n t o f i v e S e c t i o n s .  Introduction.  S e c t i o n Two  overview of the GB Framework, and  analysis.  an  definitions to our  i n 'an*  becomes VSO  from embedded  to e s t a b l i s h the u n d e r l y i n g word At S - s t r u c t u r e , the word order i s  c l a u s e s , but SVO  argue t h a t the D - s t r u c t u r e  i n 'anna' c l a u s e s .  of SA  i s SVO,  and  i s based on evidence  to support  We  that  at S - s t r u c t u r e v i a verb movement.  arguments w i l l be presented  to  relevance  To e x p l a i n the e x t r a c t i o n of NP's  order of sentences in SA.  based on  w i l l present  will  this  Two  main  this analysis.  from the Binding theory.  The  One  other i s  s i m p l i c i t y measures i n e x p l a i n i n g Case assignment  the s u b j e c t , s i n c e there w i l l  be a c o n f l i c t  assignment of case to the s u b j e c t of an Case F i l t e r  Pro-Drop phenomena.  the i n  'anna' c l a u s e .  f o r c e s verb movement so that the  [NP,S], can get Case.  The  subject,  S e c t i o n Four w i l l d i s c u s s C l i t i c s  w i l l argue that the c l i t i c must appear i n order to the c o n t e n t s  Finally,  i n S e c t i o n F i v e , I present  of arguments to show that the d i s t i n c t behavior  We  identify  of pro as w e l l as absorb the Case assigned  that p o s i t i o n .  and  Pro-drop i s t i e d to c l i t i c i z a t i o n . -  Both, i n f a c t , i n v o l v e the empty nominal p o s i t i o n , pro.  set  is  S e c t i o n Three addresses the issue of word order  c l a u s e s , i t i s necessary  VSO  S e c t i o n One  in p a r t i c u l a r  of the p r i n c i p l e s that are of d i r e c t  in SA.  be  a  to  final  i n the  3  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of 'anna' f o l l o w s from the proposed a n a l y s i s .  automatically  II.  A.  THE GB FRAMEWORK The  GB t h e o r y ,  from e a r l i e r of  AN OVERVIEW OF THE GB FRAMEWORK  Chomsky  work, i n p a r t i c u l a r  t h e 'Extended Standard  1976,  (1981),  has developed  from t h e g e n e r a l  Theory'  ( E S T ) : Chomsky  1977, 1980), Chomsky and L a s n i k  literature.  Conceptually,  system of r u l e s principles.  l a n g u a g e s may d i f f e r application.  This  English  on t h e o t h e r  The  from each o t h e r  with  respect  of parameters  of parametric parameter  hand,  central  concern  to their  i n which  variations.  for the n u l l  are setpositively  A clear  subject  s u b j e c t s such as  for this  parameter.  i s s e t n e g a t i v e l y , so t h e s u b j e c t  must have p h o n o l o g i c a l  distribution typology  and r a t h e r n a t u r a l  Languages t h a t a l l o w m i s s i n g  and Spanish  from a  universally,  i s the theory  Italian  position  GB r e p r e s e n t s a s h i f t  hold  i s the pro-drop  phenomena.  (1973,  the p r i n c i p l e s  languages a r e the r e s u l t example  framework  (1977) and s u b s e q u e n t  t o a system of simple  Although  directly  content.  o f t h e GB t h e o r y  i s to p r e d i c t the  of nominal elements, and t o determine a  o f empty c a t e g o r i e s .  The t h e o r y  predicts ina  p r i n c i p l e d manner whether n o m i n a l e l e m e n t s a r e 1) f u l l lexical  NP's, i e . a f u l l y  anaphors or l e x i c a l NP-traces, subject  realized  expression,  lexical  p r o n o u n s , o r 2) empty c a t e g o r i e s ,  PRO, v a r i a b l e s (WH-traces) o r p r o ( t h e  of pro- drop languages).  missing  GB t h e o r y d i s t i n g u i s h e s  between two p e r s p e c t i v e s , one e m p h a s i z e s t h e r u l e  4  ie.  system,  5  the other  emphasizes the systems of p r i n c i p l e s .  perspectives  1. THE  i n t e r a c t to achieve  Both  the goal of the  theory.  RULE SYSTEM  The  subcomponents of the r u l e system according  to  Chomsky (1982) a r e : (1) A  lexicon  B  syntax  C  i.  base component  ii.  transformational  component  i n t e r p r e t i v e components i.  Phonological  form component  ii.  L o g i c a l form component  Each of these components has a s p e c i a l f u n c t i o n . l e x i c o n s p e c i f i e s the items,  'inherent'  p r o p e r t i e s of  lexical  i n p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r t i e s such as thematic  s e l e c t i o n a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . For example, a verb 'persuade' has  the property  r o l e to each category  The  and like  of a s s i g n i n g a c e r t a i n thematic  i t subcategorizes,  i e . i t s object  the c l a u s a l complement as i n "John persuaded B i l l  to  The  form  l e x i c o n a l s o s p e c i f i e s p r o p e r t i e s of phonetic  meaning t h a t are not determined by The  representations  and  through  items a s s o c i a t e d with 0 - r o l e s  of grammatical f u n c t i o n s  subject, object, etc..  leave."  rule.  r u l e s of the base generate D-structures  i n s e r t i o n of l e x i c a l  and  into  (GF), such as  Only GF p o s i t i o n s assigned  9-roles  6 are l e x i c a l l y  filled  at D - s t r u c t u r e .  option of p h o n e t i c a l l y n u l l  There i s a l s o the  PRO.  D - s t r u c t u r e s are r e l a t e d to S - s t r u c t u r e s e s s e n t i a l l y a general freely.  rule,  'Move a', which a l l o w s any category  a p p l i c a t i o n of Move a. 0-role  to move  T h i s i s f e a s i b l e because the p r i n c i p l e s of the  theory provide c o n s t r a i n t s on S - s t r u c t u r e and on  may  by  GB  the  An element i n S - s t r u c t u r e bearing a  move to a p o s i t i o n that i s assigned  no ©-role,  l e a v i n g t r a c e s coindexed with t h e i r antecedent as i s the f o l l o w i n g example: (2)  a.  John  seems t i  i  verb  left.  to have  left,  i  b. *John wanted t  In (2)a. the subject  to have  i 'John', although  'leave', must move to get Case.  since the verb subject.  i t i s ©-marked by  Movement i s p o s s i b l e  'seem' does not a s s i g n a ©-role to i t s  In (2)b. on the other hand, movement i s not  p o s s i b l e s i n c e both the verbs 'want' and  'leave' a s s i g n  ©-roles, thus both p o s i t i o n s must be f i l l e d at  every  the  with arguments  l e v e l of r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .  S - s t r u c t u r e s are assigned a PF r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n the p h o n o l o g i c a l component. in the LF component.  They are assigned an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n  Thus S - s t r u c t u r e i s an a s s o c i a t i o n  between r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of form and meaning, although  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of  the mappings of S - s t r u c t u r e onto PF and  are independent of one  another.  Hence the core grammar i s  LF  7 represented as f o l l o w s , (Chomsky and L a s n i k ,  1977):  (3) D-structure  Move a  S-structure  PF component  LF component  2. THE SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES The p e r s p e c t i v e of the GB theory that focuses on p r i n c i p l e s c o n t a i n s the f o l l o w i n g subsystems: (4)  (a) X - bar theory (b) 9 - theory (c) C o n t r o l theory (d) Binding (e) Case  theory  theory  (f) Government theory (g) Bounding  theory  S e v e r a l of these s u b t h e o r i e s w i l l be p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t to our a n a l y s i s s p e c i f i c a l l y , Case theory, Government theory and the Empty Category P r i n c i p l e Bounding theory and i n p a r t i c u l a r  (ECP), as w e l l as the the Subjacency p r i n c i p l e .  8 The  X-bar  theory  This  theory  radically  r e d u c e s t h e c l a s s of  base components.  I t expresses  given  i t s structural  category  by  the  phrasal  possible  expansion  representation. there  X and  n  where the  constituent X  constituent  6  s t r u c t u r e of  X  -1  n  n  the  must c o n t a i n  form X as  any  It i s  assumed t h a t , w i t h i n a maximal p r o j e c t i o n X, a complement, a  of  is a > X  head -  n  1 ,  i t s head a  bar.  - Theory The  ©-theory  thematic  r o l e s ( s u c h as  positions.  The  ©-criterion.  0-role;  only  one  argument  can  dual  ©-roles  syntactic  of  to c e r t a i n  ©-theory  is  like  The  the  The be  one  and and  ©-criterion  of  Movement  s i n c e the  representations: from a  ©-position  e l e m e n t moved w o u l d subject  p o s i t i o n of  a ©-position  s i n c e an  be a NP  in:  seems t  t o be  It s t a t e s that (ie.  a  fool.  i  Projection Principle  level  LF.  'seem' c a n n o t  i s assigned  levels  (cf.(2b)).  i  ©-criterion.  the  1981:36).  and  i s blocked  John  The  of  each 0 - r o l e  (Chomsky  move i n t o i t a s  (5)  that  S-structure  t o a ©-position  verb  and  a p p l i e s to a l l three  D-structure,  assigned  assignment  I t r e q u i r e s t h a t e a c h argument b e a r s one  one  effectively  the  a g e n t , theme, e t c . )  basic principle  only  raising  i s concerned with  LF,  D-  is closely  associated with  representations and  at  S-structures),  each are  the  9 projected  from t h e l e x i c o n  subcategorization 1981:29).  I t follows  then  representations  observe the  that  items  (Chomsky  the subcategorization  syntactic level.  a t each of t h e t h r e e  p r o j e c t i o n s of l e x i c a l the  they  p r o p e r t i e s of l e x i c a l  must be t h e same a t e v e r y the  i n that  properties.  In o t h e r  words,  levels are  B o t h t h e © - c r i t e r i o n and  Projection P r i n c i p l e therfore c o n s t i t u t e well  conditions  frames  formedness  t h a t must be met a t a l l l e v e l s o f  representations.  Control  theory  This  theory  i s concerned with  of a b s t r a c t p r o n o m i n a l PRO. either  Within  l i n k e d t o an a n t e c e d e n t  the p o t e n t i a l reference this  t h e o r y , PRO i s  or i t i s assigned a r b i t r a r y  reference.  The  Binding This  theory.  theory  i s concerned with  the r e l a t i o n  p r o n o m i n a l s , names and v a r i a b l e s t o p o s s i b l e It the  provides  t y p e s o f NP's t h a t  binding (6)  t h e grammar w i t h  conditions  Binding  antecedents.  a p r i n c i p l e d way o f  can appear.  as g i v e n  of anaphors,  determining  The f o l l o w i n g a r e t h e  by Chomsky  (1981:188):  Theory  (A) An anaphor  i s bound  (B) A p r o n o m i n a l  i s free  (C) An R - e x p r e s s i o n (where X i s bound  i n i t s governing  category.  i n i t s governing  category.  i s free.  i f c-commanded by an a n t e c e d e n t  and f r e e  10  otherwise).  It follows  pronominals are free  from t h e s e c o n d i t i o n s  that  lexical  i n p o s i t i o n s where a n a p h o r s a r e bound,  as i n : (7)  John  saw him. i  (8)  John  j / * i saw  himself.  i In  ( 7 ) , s i n c e p r o n o m i n a l s must  category  be f r e e w i t h i n  the governing  S ( c o n d i t i o n B) 'him' c a n n o t be c o i n d e x e d w i t h t h e  subject. be  i / * j  In ( 8 ) , on t h e o t h e r  bound w i t h i n  i t s governing  'John' c-commands t h e a n a p h o r ,  hand, s i n c e an a n a p h o r must category  S ( c o n d i t i o n A ) , and  i t may be c o i n d e x e d w i t h t h e  antecedent. Since binding  PRO  i s a pronominal anaphor,  conditions  however,  that  i t must be f r e e .  i t must be bound  intrinsic  referential  contradiction,  like  content.  PRO must a p p e a r  under  the Binding  ungrammatical the is  other  hand,  free within  Government w i l l  only  and  will  i n ungoverned p o s i t i o n s and t h e r e f o r e F o r example,  since  at a later  upon  (9) a .  * J o h n wanted  (9)b.  J o h n wanted  S.  is  ( 9 ) b . on  point  i n Section  The d e f i n i t i o n o f in this  V.  f o r [ PRO t o win ] ] . s  [-[ PRO t o w i n s  (9)a.  PRO i s n o t g o v e r n e d and  i t s governing category  be e l a b o r a t e d  does n o t  i s g o v e r n e d by ' f o r ' .  i s grammatical  be g i v e n  i t h a s no  Because of t h i s  conditions.  b e c a u s e PRO  from t h e  A t t h e same t i m e ,  anaphors s i n c e  where i t h a s no g o v e r n i n g c a t e g o r y fall  i t follows  ]].  section  GB PRO  f u r t h e r d i s t i n g u i s h e s between the empty  [+anaphor, +pronominal], and the empty pronominal  [-anaphor, +pronominal]. l a t t e r category will  pronominal pro  Chomsky (1982) introduced the  to account  for the pro-drop  phenomena.  be d i s c u s s e d at l e n g t h i n S e c t i o n IV and w i l l  This  be used  in the a n a l y s i s here to represent missing s u b j e c t s in SA.  Case  theory. T h i s theory i s concerned  and  with the assignment of Case,  r e q u i r e s that every NP with p h o n o l o g i c a l content  r e c e i v e s Case.  Case i s assigned to NP's  Case marking p o s i t i o n s ,  when they are i n  f o r example s u b j e c t s of  tensed  c l a u s e s , o b j e c t s of t r a n s i t i v e verbs and o b j e c t s of prepositions.  Assignment of Case i s subject to c o n d i t i o n of  governments (see  below).  Case i s presumably assigned or checked at D - s t r u c t u r e or S - s t r u c t u r e . case are f i l t e r e d  In PF,  lexical  items that are not  out by the Case f i l t e r .  Chomsky (1981:49), the Case f i l t e r *  NP  According  to  i s s t a t e d as f o l l o w s :  i f NP has phonetic content and has no  T h i s theory i s of d i r e c t  assigned  case.  relevance to our proposed a n a l y s i s  and w i l l be r e f e r r e d to i n the d i s c u s s i o n of word order i n Section I I I .  Government Theory The n o t i o n government i s c e n t r a l to and throughout  the GB  theory.  I t i s r e l e v a n t to  pervasive  12  s u b c a t e g o r i z a t i o n and the 0 binding ©-marking and Case theory.  theory, and t i e s  Government  i s formally  defined  as f o l l o w s Chomsky, 1981:250): [ / 3 . . . 7 . . . C 1 . . . 7 ]  , where  (a) a = X* or i s coindexed with 7 (b) where <p i s a maximal p r o j e c t i o n , i f 4> dominates 7 then 0 dominates a. (c) a c-commands 7. In t h i s case a governs 7.  The d e f i n i t i o n  of c-command that we w i l l use here i s the  f o l l o w i n g : a c-commands 0 i f f ( i ) a does not c o n t a i n 0 , and ( i i ) there i s no maximal p r o j e c t i o n dominating a that does not dominate 0 . T h i s d e f i n i t i o n expresses that the domain of government i s the maximal p r o j e c t i o n of the governing head, and that the head must c-command the governee w i t h i n the maximal p r o j e c t i o n as i n : (I0)a. X  X where X i s the maximal p r o j e c t i o n of X, X i s the head of X, t h e r e f o r e X governs Y.  1 3  (10)b.  X  X  z  X  Z  V  where Z i s a maximal p r o j e c t i o n , X does not govern Within  the  theory  of government  Empty Category P r i n c i p l e (ECP).  i s the p r i n c i p l e  i s a narrower d e f i n i t i o n of government.  Bounding The  This  principle We  will  V.  theory  Bounding theory  s p e c i f i e s l o c a l i t y c o n d i t i o n s , in  p a r t i c u l a r the Subjacency c o n d i t i o n , c f . Subjacency i s a c o n d i t i o n on the h o l d between antecedents and  a moved element can  Chomsky  (1977).  k i n d of r e l a t i o n s that  t r a c e s and  r e s t r i c t s the movements of NP.  To  Proper government  r o l e i n our proposed a n a l y s i s .  delay d i s c u s s i o n of i t u n t i l S e c t i o n  The  the  I t r e q u i r e s that t r a c e s of  moved elements must be p r o p e r l y governed.  plays a c r u c i a l  Y.  may  as such, i t  According  to t h i s c o n d i t i o n  not c r o s s more than one  bounding node.  illustrate:  (11)  Who  d i d John say  (12)  What d i d you  say  [ f s  [ t" left s  ] ]  [ t ' John l i k e s t " ]  (13) a. I wonder [-what[Mary claimed  [-(that)  [ J o h n had  seen]]]]  1 4 (13)b. *I  wonder[what[Mary h e a r d f t h e S  l  Sentences  (11),  claim[that  However ,A  Subjacency Condition.  an  t h e moved e l e m e n t  NP) v i o l a t i n g  between  languages.  i n E n g l i s h a r e S and NP above. NP  i s ungrammatical nodes  to parametric  F o r example  (Chomsky,  The b o u n d i n g nodes  (Sportiche,  1 3)b.-  of the  variation  i n F r e n c h and I t a l i a n a r e S a n d  1981, a n d R i z z i ,  1978).  For s i m p l i c i t y ,  S a n d NP a r e t h e b o u n d i n g nodes  will  not attempt  t o make a d i s t i n c t i o n  distinguish that  the bounding  constructions  a r e base g e n e r a t e d .  relative  clause  SA  appear  theory, with  we w i l l  from  we w i l l  a r e base generated  t o use a r e s u m p t i v e p r o n o u n  We  be a b l e t o  moved c a t e g o r i e s  from movements.  i n SA.  we  between S and S.  In p a r t i c u l a r ,  constructions  WH-formations r e s u l t  nodes  1981), a n d a s i l l u s t r a t e d  assume t h a t  using  and  the bounding  will  By  (an S a n d  Condition.  B o u n d i n g nodes a r e s u b j e c t they vary  s i n c e the  violation  crosses-two bounding  the Subjacency  had s e e n ] ] ] ] ]  5  (12) a n d ( I 3 ) a . a r e p e r m i t t e d  movement a p p l i e s c y c l i c a l l y w i t h o u t  since  [John  S  MP  show  those that  whereas  Both c o n s t r u c t i o n s i n strategy.  To  illustrate: (14) ra'a-y-tu saw-  I  [^ssayarat the car 'I  (15)  - a [ ^ l a t i [ h a t a m a - ha a r r a j u l s  acc that  broke(3sg.m)-it  saw t h e c a r t h a t  t h e man  broke'  -u]]]  t h e man-nom  15  man  [^ra'a-y-ta sayarat-u - hu ]  who saw-you(sg.m) car-nom- h i s 'Whose c a r d i d you see'  Thus, from (14) and (15), i t i s l e g i t i m a t e to assume that both c o n s t r u c t i o n s may be d e r i v e d by movement as there i s no v i o l a t i o n of Subjacency.  However, s t r u c t u r e s such as the  f o l l o w i n g , taken from Aoun (1979), are grammatical. (16) ra'a-y-tu saw-I  [ad-dubat -a. [ a l l a 5 i - n a UP  i  s  [qala l i S  t h e o f f i c e r s - a c c who-(pl.m) said(3sg.m)to me  1-hakim -u [.anna-hu [sajana [almutamarredin-a s s thegovernor-nomthat-he emprisoned(3sg.m)themutineers-acc UP  Lalla3i-na s  [ satamu-hum,] ] ] ] ] ]] j s l  who-pl.m.  insulted(3pl)them  'I saw the o f f i c e r s that the governor t o l d me t h a t he emprisoned  If  the mutineers that i n s u l t e d them.'  (16) i s d e r i v e d by movement,  i t would be i n v i o l a t i o n of  Subjacency as the moved element would have c r o s s e d more that two bounding nodes (an NP and S ( o r S ) ) . obeys the Complex NP C o n s t r a i n t  But given that SA  (CNPC) (see below), subsumed  under Subjacency, cf.Ross (1977), Aoun (1979), and given that examples such as (16) e x i s t  i n SA, we are l e a d to  assume that r e l a t i v e c l a u s e formation not generated by movement.  i s base generated and  16 Now  l e t us compare t h e f o l l o w i n g  examples:  (I7)a. wajat-tu  [l-kitab-a[alla3i[3anan-tu[anna[alwalad-a  t  NP  found-I  3  a  6  the book-acc  that  s  thought-I that  the  boy-acc  rama-hu,] ] ] ] ] threw ( i t ) 'I  f o u n d t h e book t h a t  t h e boy  threw  (it).'  (17)b. *man. wa j a t - t u [ a ^ l k i t a b - a [_ala3i [ 5anan-tu[ a n n a - (hu.) [rama-hu]]]]] s  s  By t h e same l i n e constructions  o f a r g u m e n t a t i o n , i f we  a r e base  be g r a m m a t i c a l and derivation. question (This  it are  obeys lead  predicts the  t h e r e s u m p t i v e pronoun  i s f a r more r e s t r i c t e d i s raised  behaves  in Section  differently  t h e CNPC and  expect  (17)b. t o  to r e g u l a r i z e  than  in relative  V).  Since t h i s  with respect  the d e r i v a t i o n  the  resumptive  to Subjacency i e .  i s derived  we  by  i s not base g e n e r a t e d .  summary, we  have o b s e r v e d t h a t  t h e GB  framework  i n a p r i n c i p l e d manner t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f NP's  domain  in  clauses.  i s ungrammatical,  t o assume t h a t W H - c o n s t r u c t i o n  movement and In  would  WH-  B u t , t h e d e s t r i b u t i o n of r e s u m p t i v e pronoun  issue  pronoun  g e n e r a t e d , we  assume t h a t  i n which  framework w i l l  t h e y may  a i d us  nominal elements  appear.  The  a d o p t i o n of  and  this  i n p r e d i c t i n g the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of  i n SA,  i n p a r t i c u l a r the nominal  elements  1 7  that appear i n subject p o s i t i o n .  X-bar theory and  ©-theory  as w e l l as the P r o j e c t i o n P r i n c i p l e , ©-criterion and Case theory p r e d i c t the d i s t r i b u t i o n of NP's S-structures.  The  and  type of NP however i s determined  l e x i c o n , Case theory and Binding theory. specific  i n D- and  by  the  Furthermore,  t h e o r i e s such as the Case theory, Binding theory ,  and Government w i l l  be of d i r e c t  relevance as they  will  enter i n t o the subsequent a n a l y s i s of some aspects of syntax of Standard accounting  Arabic.  the  T h i s i n turn w i l l a i d i n  f o r what seems to be a d i s t i n c t behavior  e x t r a c t i o n of s u b j e c t s from embedded c l a u s e s .  i n the  Ill. In t h i s SA i s a VSO  WORD-ORDER AND  s e c t i o n , I w i l l argue a g a i n s t  the a n a l y s i s that  language and w i l l propose an a l t e r n a t i v e  a n a l y s i s of SA as an SVO  A. VSO  CASE ASSIGNMENT  language.  ANALYSIS  The " t r a d i t i o n a l " assumption w i t h i n the  generative  framework has been that the u n d e r l y i n g  word-order  VSO,  cf.  T h i s i s based on the  fact  that when a sentence c o n t a i n s a v e r b a l element, the  Aoun (1979), Emonds (1980).  of SA i s  verb precedes the s u b j e c t when i t i s l e x i c a l as i n ( 1 8 ) u n l e s s emphasis  i s on the 'agent' s u b j e c t ,  i n which case i t  precedes the verb as i n (19): (18) 3ahaba alwalad  - u  wentOsg.m) the boy-nom 'The boy went' (19)  alwalad  - u Sahaba  ' The boy went' It has been assumed that the u n d e r l y i n g f o l l o w i n g according  to Aoun (1979):  (20) S  18  s t r u c t u r e i s the  19  Within by  this  co-superscripting.  different for of  s t r u c t u r e , grammatical  from the  binding. the  i s a type  of  indexing  in turn  are  expressed  indexing  c o - s u b s c r i p t i n g , the  This  following  This  relations  indexing  that  is  required  forms a d i s c o n t i n u o u s  VP  form:  (21 ) k  p  k  AGR Here t h e the  subject  object  coindexing  NP  cf.  (1979).  Section  as  the  S  NP  coindexed with proper  receives  This  coindexed  the  government  i t s C a s e from notion  O  verb.  with  be  and  This  f o r Case  assignment.  i t s (proper)  will  AGR  governor,  elaborated  upon i n  V.  Within  t h i s a n a l y s i s , SVO  Topicalization. i s not  NP  expresses  Thus, t h e Aoun  V i s defined  i s the  p  Hence, t h e  ©-marked to allow  word o r d e r  initial  is derived  position  movement w i t h o u t  by  i n the  violation  sentence of  the  ©-criterion.  B.  AN  ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS I would  First,  SVO  in matrix as  like  to propose that  word o r d e r s , s e n t e n c e s as  i n embedded c l a u s e s .  either  an  'an'  in each c l a u s e , complementizer  o r an  in fact,  SA  occur  illustrated The  latter  in  introduces  i t .  SVO  along (18)  may  be  'anna' c o m p l e m e n t i z e r .  however, depends on that  i s an  with  and  VSO  ones  ( 1 9 ) , as  introduced The  the c h o i c e 'an'  language.  of  by  word  order  the  requires a  well  VSO  20 word-order and a s s i g n s the Subjunctive mood  (mudari  mansub).  r e q u i r e s an  'anna' a s s i g n s a c c u s a t i v e Case and  word order.  To  {  SVO  illustrate:  (22) arada  almudarres -u  [. an  [ yaktub-a  1-walad-u  s  s  u  want(3sg.m)theteacher-nom that write(3sg.m)-subj.theboy-nom d-darrs-a]] the lesson-acc 'The  teacher wanted the boy  to w r i t e the l e s s o n '  (23) arada almudarres-u  [-anna [1-walad - a yaktub-u d-dars-a  s  3 ]  s the boy-acc w r i t e - i n d i e .  'The  teacher wanted the boy  These f a c t s t h e r e f o r e support  to w r i t e the l e s s o n . '  an SVO  order as w e l l as an  VSO  of r e f l e x i v e anaphors supports  the  one. Second, the behavior c l a i m that SA  i s an SVO  language.  R e c a l l from S e c t i o n 2  that anaphors must be bound w i t h i n t h e i r governing For example, i n (24), the anaphor "nafsa-hu" to be bound by "alwaladu"  category.  ( h i m s e l f ) needs  (the boy), i t s antecedent:  (24) kalama  al-walad -u  spoke(3sg.m) 'The  nafsa - hu  the boy-nom  boy  s e l f - him  spoke to h i m s e l f . '  If the VSO  a n a l y s i s i s adopted, the anaphor i s bound i n i t s  governing  category S a c c o r d i n g to c o n d i t i o n A of the b i n d i n g  theory.  The  l e x i c a l NP  "alwaladu",  however, i s a l s o bound  21 w i t h i n the governing (21).  category  S as  illustrated  in s t r u c t u r e  T h i s i s in d i r e c t v i o l a t i o n of c o n d i t i o n C of  the  b i n d i n g theory, which s t i p u l a t e s that an R-expression be  free.  Thus the subject must be higher  i e . o u t s i d e the p r o j e c t i o n of the verb. assume an SVO violation  must  i n the s t r u c t u r e , Therefore,  a n a l y s i s with the s t r u c t u r e of  i f we  (25), then  this  i s avoid.  (25) S  NP  INFL  VP  V Further  support  f o r the SVO  assignment to the s u b j e c t of an a n a l y s i s , where SVO difficult  conflict  proposal concerns Case 'anna' c l a u s e .  In the  i s d e r i v e d by T o p i c a l i z a t i o n ,  to e x p l a i n how  'anna' and why  NP  Case i s assigned  i t gets a c c u s a t i v e Case.  VSO  i t is  to the subject of There w i l l be a  i n the Case assignment of that p o s i t i o n since  'anna' i s a Case a s s i g n e r and must a s s i g n i t s Case. same time the c o i n d e x i n g  between AGR  and  the  At  the  subject  p o s i t i o n f o r Nominative Case assignment w i l l a l s o h o l d . Thus, w i t h i n the VSO  a n a l y s i s there i s no obvious way  answer these q u e s t i o n s  and  to  block Nominative Case assignment.  However, i n the a n a l y s i s proposed here there i s a  simple  22 s o l u t i o n as i s shown below. If we assume that SVO word order i s basic then need t o show how VSO i s d e r i v e d . are e i t h e r the verb i s preposed VP.  i n SA, we  The two p o s s i b i l i t i e s  or the subject moves i n t o  These two o p t i o n s are shown i n (26) and (27)  respectively. (26) Verb-preposing  23  to the verb,  the  verb  would g o v e r n  directly  0-mark i t .  argument  s t r u c t u r e of t h e v e r b ,  the  the  well  will  alternative, If  we  questions subject  we  get  questions  are  this  analysis,  we  in Matrix  recent  will  (1985)). binding  (these  work  rely  will  element  and  an  character  and  has  1) How  S.  does  the  v e r b movement i n does  answer  of  the  these We  will right  parametric  (1983) and  sentence  Koopman  "inflectional"  d o m i n a t e d by  (AGR).  features person,  NP.  a d j o i n s to  three further  I t c o n t a i n s the  is finite  i s the element  subject  reject  o n l y a p p l i e s to the  Sproat  agreement e l e m e n t  a p p e a r s when t h e  to  as  p a r a m e t e r s have been d i s c u s s e d i n  1981).  the  the  other  Case t h e o r y .  i s a result  (INFL) i s d i r e c t l y  [•tense],  Case t o t h e  To  f u r t h e r assume t h a t t h e  (Chomsky,  assumed t h a t AGR  on  i n SA  This  i n Government by  We  order?  of  of c o n d i t i o n C  i s SVO? 3) How  crucially  specific  head o f S  It  t r a c e of  l e a d us  the  i s t h e r e no  SVO  the  Projection Principle  there are  t h e word o r d e r  r e q u i r e s adjacency.  variation  the  These a r e :  i t s C a s e ? 2) Why  case  not  in violation  in violation  l e d to adopt  assume t h a t Case a s s i g n m e n t and  be  binding theory  need t o answer.  'anna' c l a u s e and subject  will  v e r b movement - where t h e v e r b  adopt  get  We  NP,  Hence, t h e  as c o n d i t i o n C of t h e  s u b j e c t movement.  this  Furthermore,  bind a l e x i c a l  binding theory.  s u b j e c t but  t h i s movement would change  Projection Principle.  moved NP of  Since  the  S and  and  i s the  features AGR  i s nominal i n  number and  gender.  i e . [+tense].  t h a t g o v e r n s and  It is  assigns  24 With these assumptions and how is  Case theory, we  the p r e v i o u s l y r a i s e d q u e s t i o n s  w i l l show  are answered.  Since  AGR  the element that a s s i g n s Case to the s u b j e c t , and Case i s  only assigned  to the r i g h t , there must e x i s t a r u l e i n the  grammar that moves AGR  to the l e f t  and a d j o i n s i t to S.  i s then i n a p o s i t i o n to a s s i g n Case to the s u b j e c t NP its  right.  AGR to  1  Since  INFL has  no f u l l  l e x i c a l s t a t u s , i t appears  p h o n e t i c a l l y as part of a v e r b a l a f f i x system i n s u r f a c e structure.  Thus, verb preposing  provide a l o c u s for AGR  i s o b l i g a t o r y in order  to c l i t i c i z e  to.  We  w i l l assume  that t h i s verb movement a d j o i n i n g the verb to AGR p r i o r to S - s t r u c t u r e . find  i n matrix  illustrates  applies  T h i s r e s u l t s in the word order  we  sentences with v e r b a l elements where the  precedes the subject as i n (18).  The  to  verb  following structure  this:  (28) S  Another p o s s i b i l i t y i s to assume that AGR o r i g i n a t e s in an i n i t i a l p o s i t i o n in the base i . e . , the u n d e r l y i n g word order i s INFL NP VP. T h i s p o s s i b i l i t y was r e j e c t e d s i n c e there w i l l be no adjacency between the complementier 'anna' and the embedded subject NP to which i t a s s i g n s a c c u s a t i v e case. 1  25  For matrix  sentences  with no overt v e r b a l element such as:  (29) alwalad - u the boy-  nom  'The  boy  f i - 1-manzel - i in -the-house - gen i s i n the house.'  we propose that there i s an empty copula, f o l l o w i n g a suggestion of M.  Rochemont.  T h i s copula  same manner as a l e x i c a l verb.  f u n c t i o n s in the  I t must be present  f o r Case to be assigned to the subject NP, sentence would be r u l e d out by the Case We The  can now  otherwise  the  filter.  apply t h i s a n a l y s i s to embedded c l a u s e s .  d i f f e r e n c e between 'an' and  e x p l a i n e d i f we a s s i g n e r , but  in order  'anna' c l a u s e can now  be  f u r t h e r s p e c i f y that 'anna' i s a Case  'an'  i s not.  preposing must occur  As  i n matrix  sentences,  verb  i n 'an' c l a u s e s i n order to a s s i g n Case  to the s u b j e c t of the embedded c l a u s e .  Since  'anna' i s a  Case a s s i g n e r , however, i t a s s i g n s Case to the s u b j e c t so that no verb preposing the r e q u i r e d SVO A remaining sentences.  We  i s necessary.  word order  The  r e s u l t of t h i s i s  i n 'anna' c l a u s e s .  problem i s SVO  word order  i n matrix  propose that t h i s r e s u l t s from  T o p i c a l i z a t i o n , a movement r u l e . higher A p o s i t i o n p e r i p h e r a l to S. the f o l l o w i n g s t r u c t u r e :  The Topic i s moved to a Hence the SVO  order  has  26  (30) S  NP  INFL  VP  V  1.  1  . As f a r as the ECP  t.  i s concerned, the t r a c e of the subject  w i l l be p r o p e r l y governed by the verb.  In summary, we have  argued i n t h i s s e c t i o n that i f the u n d e r l y i n g SA i s SVO,  NP  s t r u c t u r e of  not only grammatical r e l a t i o n s are expressed in  terms of t h e i r c o n s t i t u e n t s t r u c t u r e s but Case  assignment  can a l s o be accounted for i n a u n i f i e d way  i n matrix and  embedded c l a u s e s .  automatically  Furthermore, i t f o l l o w s  from the proposed a n a l y s i s that the subject of 'anna' i s assigned  a c c u s a t i v e case.  seemed to be a c o n f l i c t  Thus, t h i s a n a l y s i s r e s o l v e s what  i n the case assignment of t h i s  p o s i t i o n under the VSO a n a l y s i s .  IV. Up with  until  subject  elements.  PRO-DROP PHENOMENA AND C L I T I C S .  this  s e c t i o n , the proposed a n a l y s i s has d e a l t  position  filled  with  full  lexical  To c o m p l e t e o u r a n a l y s i s , we w i l l  consider  i n s t a n c e s where argument p o s i t i o n s a r e f i l l e d nominal elements  . Hence, we t a l k  nominal  with  about m i s s i n g  empty  s u b j e c t s and  clitics. SA  i s a null  argument  or o b j e c t s a p p e a r i n g  language, with missing  a s i n (31) a n d (32)  subjects  respectively.  (31 ) dahaba went(3sg.m.) 'He  went.'  (32) kataba wrote(3sg.m.) 'He  be  Spanish,  French  it(m.sg.)-acc  wrote i t . '  In l a n g u a g e s t h a t a l l o w Italian,  - hu  missing  objects  and SA, a c l i t i c  must n e c e s s a r i l y  present. In t h i s  the m i s s i n g  Section,  first  subject property  we w i l l  present  adopted here.  attempt  t o answer t h e f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n s :  clitics  analyzed?  clitics  and missing  clitics? in  such a s  'anna'  2) What  t h e a n a l y s i s of Then we  1) How a r e  i s the r e l a t i o n s h i p  objects?  4) Why may a c l i t i c  3) Why a r e t h e r e appear  clauses?  27  will  between no s u b j e c t  i n the subject  position  28 A. PRO-DROP ANALYSIS Thus f a r we have assumed that the s u b j e c t p o s i t i o n i n a sentence i s o b l i g a t o r y Chomsky, 1981,1982).  In S e c t i o n  Three, we argued that the .subject i n SA i s generated VP.  Now  l e t us turn to examples where we have n u l l  outside subject  p o s i t i o n s as i n the f o l l o w i n g examples: (33) Sahaba went(3sg.m.) 'He went.' (34) 3ahab - u went(3pl.m) 'They went.'  From the s u r f a c e form of these sentences, we cannot  tell  whether the subject p o s i t i o n i s o b l i g a t o r y or not s i n c e i t i s empty.  However, t o account f o r the  morphological  d i f f e r e n c e s i n the agreement marker that i s r e f l e c t e d on the verb and t o s a t i s f y the 0 - c r i t e r i o n and the P r o j e c t i o n P r i n c i p l e , we have t o assume that there must be an empty pronominal with which the verb agrees.  I w i l l assume that  t h i s empty pronominal i s pro [ -anaphor, +pronominal ] f o l l o w i n g Chomsky (1982). In the d i s c u s s i o n of the typology  of empty pronominals,  Chomsky (1982), argues that pro i s best s u i t e d f o r representing  the missing  s u b j e c t s i n pro-drop languages f o r  29  v a r i o u s reasons. languages can  F i r s t , missing  subjects  i n pro-drop  never be a r b i t r a r y i n r e f e r e n c e .  accounted f o r i f PRO  T h i s i s not  i s used in t h i s p o s i t i o n .  Secondly, in  Spanish i n t e r r o g a t i v e s a r u l e of verb f r o n t i n g a p p l i e s , p l a c i n g the subject  in a governed p o s i t i o n , c f .  T h i s makes i t impossible  (1984).  the missing  s u b j e c t s , at l e a s t  to use PRO  i n Spanish.  to  Torrego represent  T h i r d l y , the  use  of pro makes i t unnecessary to invoke a parameter i n v o l v i n g movement of INFL i n the syntax i n order  to allow  PRO  to  appear i n the ungoverned p o s i t i o n ( r u l e R of Chomsky, 1981).  The  represent  only c o n d i t i o n on the appearance of pro  the missing  determined' by AGR.  subject  i s that  i t must be  T h i s i s only p e r m i s s i b l e  enough to i d e n t i f y the f e a t u r e s of pro.  'locally  i f AGR  in  in ( 3 3 )  ( 3 4 ) . T h i s c o n t r a s t s with E n g l i s h where there  r i c h agreement and  therefore, a f u l l  is rich  For example, r i c h  agreement i s r e f l e c t e d on the verb as i l l u s t r a t e d and  to  i s no  pronoun must appear as  He went. / * Went.  B. CLITICS The  a n a l y s i s which we  w i l l adopt of c l i t i c s  i s that  they are base generated as a f e a t u r e on the head that they cliticize  to.  I t f o l l o w s from the P r o j e c t i o n P r i n c i p l e that  a ©-marked p o s i t i o n must be s t r u c t u r a l l y represented it  i s empty.  Therefore,  the c l i t i c  an empty argument p o s i t i o n . the c l i t i c  We  even i f  must be a s s o c i a t e d  f u r t h e r assume that  with  since  appears as a feature on the head, i t c-commands  30  and  governs that  empty p o s i t i o n  a r i s e s as  to the  Chomsky's  (1982) a n a l y s i s and  the  t y p e of  structure that w i l l  this  be  (Borer,  1984).  The  empty c a t e g o r y . assume t h a t  adopted  question  I will  adopt  i t i s pro.  for c l i t i c s  is  Thus,  the  following: (35) X  X - cl Since  the  clitic  features  i s nominal  of p r o  g e n d e r , we  obligatory  present  Hurtado,  that  the  assigned To  the  clitic  to determine  Roberge,1985).  (Aoun,1979),  of  out'  of  a  b a r e nouns.  is restricted only  is illustrated  of  pro  the  Case  feature  this  a s s u m p t i o n , we Construct  right  (Borer  appear a t t a c h e d -  features  f u r t h e r assume  i n i t s formation  i n (36)  is  will  noun p h r a s e s  They a r e  Hebrew ones  person,  We  state structures.  form of complex  the  the  (Borer,1984).  evidence to support  form t o t h e  d e t e r m i n e r can  (36)  assume t h a t  head  succession  This  features  by  construct  since  the  'spell  the  d e t e r m i n e d and  i e . i t has  is a  structures are  structure  i n order  1985,  provide  their  could  be  clitic  to d i s c u s s  in  must  in nature,  number and  (cf.  pro  (38):  state  formed by  branching  (1984)). in that  to the  last  need  a  similar This  the constituent.  31  bab-u 1- manzil - i door-nom  the-house - gen  'the door of the house' (37) bab- u door-nom  manzil - i house  -gen  1- mudarres - i the-teacher(m)-gen  'the door of the house of the teacher' (38) *bab-u  1-manzil-i  door-nom The c o n s t r u c t  1-mudarres  the-house-gen  the-teacher  s t a t e s t r u c t u r e i s thus represented a s :  (39) i  We w i l l assume, f o l l o w i n g Borer's a n a l y s i s ,  that  G e n i t i v e Case i s assigned by the head noun only i f the f i r s t node (N), which dominates that head (N) immediately  32 dominates the complement,cf. expansion  which r e s u l t s  Borer  in right  as  t h e use o f a d j e c t i v e s ,  in  (40) r e p r e s e n t e d as ( 4 1 ) .  (1984:48).  branching  Any  o f t h e head  such  l e a d s t o the u n g r a m m a t i c a l i t y  as  (40) * al-bab-u the-door-nom  1-kabir-u 1-manzil the-big-nom  the-house  (41 )  \  DET  N  the The  door t h e  ungrammaticality  Since not  DET  the f i r s t  dominate  node  inserted (43).  (42)  house as  follows.  (N) w h i c h d o m i n a t e s t h e h e a d  t h e complement  derivation  the  o f (40) c a n be e x p l a i n e d  Case and t h e s t r u c t u r e the  big  N  ( N ) , (N) c a n n o t be  i s ruled  o u t by t h e C a s e  (N) d o e s  assigned filter.  t o be g r a m m a t i c a l , a C a s e a s s i g n e r  must  t o a s s i g n Case t o (N) a s i n (42) r e p r e s e n t e d  For be  as  33  It should a l s o be mentioned t h a t , structures,  in construct  the d i s t i n c t i o n between s p e c i f i e r s and  complements i s not r e f l e c t e d s t r u c t u r a l l y . (45)  state  have i d e n t i c a l s t r u c t u r e s .  (44) kitabat  - u 1- b i n t - i  w r i t i n g -nom 'the  girl's  the-girl-gen writing'  (45) kitabat  - u 1- qasTdat - i  w r i t i n g -nom the- poem - gen 'the w r i t i n g of the poem'  Thus, (44) and  34 In sum, construct  we  have i l l u s t r a t e d that the head i n a  s t a t e s t r u c t u r e a s s i g n s g e n i t i v e Case to i t s  complement.  T h i s f o l l o w s from the Case theory.  i s always r e a l i z e d m o r p h o l o g i c a l l y stipulated Stowell  i t must  (1981).  This s t i p u l a t i o n  i s e s s e n t i a l to  state structures  the assumption that Case must be r e a l i z e d , we clitics  absorb  Since c l i t i c s phrase, we construct  may  our  clitics.  with t h i s d i c u s s i o n of c o n s t r u c t  show how  be  i n the grammar that case must be r e a l i z e d , c f .  proposed a n a l y s i s for Now  in SA,  Since Case  and  can proceed to  case. appear as a feature on the head of a  expect them to appear c l i t i c i z e d  to heads of  s t a t e c o n s t r u c t i o n s as i n  (46) [ k i t a b a t - u - ha pro w r i t i n g -nom  - her/it  ]  (3sg.f)  'her w r i t i n g / the w r i t i n g of i t ' (47) * [ k i t a b a t - 0 - pro  The in  clitic  "ha"  i n (46) can  r e f e r to e i t h e r a s p e c i f i e r  (44), or a complement as i n (45).  order  ]  This c l i t i c  as  appears i n  to l o c a l l y determine the f e a t u r e s of the empty  pronominal pro.  A bare noun can  not do so s i n c e there  head-complement agreement as i n (47). construct  Since the head of  s t a t e s t r u c t u r e s a s s i g n s Case and  morphologically  i s no  that Case i s  r e a l i z e d , i t i s c o r r e c t to assume that  the  35  clitic  must be present  to i d e n t i f y the f e a t u r e s of pro as  w e l l as absorb the Case assigned this  by the head.  (47) i s t h e r e f o r e , ungrammatical s i n c e the f e a t u r e s of  pro are not i d e n t i f i e d and the Case assigned noun  Based upon  by the head  ' k i t a b a t ' i s not r e a l i z e d . Consider now the cases when both a s p e c i f i e r and a  complement  appear i n a sentence as i n :  (48)a. k i t a b a t -u  1-bint-i  1- q a s i d a t - a  writing-nom t h e - g i r l - g e n  the-poem-acc  'The g i r l ' s w r i t i n g of the poem' (48) b. k i t a b a t -u  1-bint  - i  li-l-qasidat- i  writing-nom t h e - g i r l - g e n of -the poem-gen 'The g i r l ' s w r i t i n g of the poem' (49) a.  k i t a b a t - u - ha 1-qasTdat - a  (49) b.  k i t a b a t - u - ha l i - 1 - q a s l d a t - i  (49) c.  * k i t a b a t - u -ha 1-qasidat  In (49), the c l i t i c  appears to i d e n t i f y pro as w e l l as  absorb the Case assigned noun  by the head noun.  the v e r b a l  ' k i t a b a t ' may take m u l t i p l e arguments and a s s i g n s two  0-roles,  the complement  'qasidat' may be assigned  Case by the head as i n (49)a., i n s e r t e d and assigns in  Since  (49)b.  accusative  or a Case marker may be  g e n i t i v e Case to that comlpement  The complement  g e n i t i v e Case assigned  however  NP as  does not r e c e i v e the  by the head of the c o n s t r u c t i o n  since  36  the c l i t i c absorbs that case.  Consequently  i f the  complement does not r e c e i v e Case, the d e r i v a t i o n i s ungrammatical  and  i t i s r u l e d out by the Case f i l t e r as i n  (49)c.  F u r t h e r evidence to support the f a c t that c l i t i c s Case i s p r o v i d e d from cases where c l i t i c s verbs or p r e p o s i t i o n s . frames and X-theory, presence ie.  appear attached to  According to s u b c a t e g o r i z a t i o n  heads of c o n s t r u c t i o n s r e q u i r e the  of t h e i r complements.  If the comlement i s empty,  pro, i t s contents must be i d e n t i f i e d .  To  illustrate:  (50)a. daraba hit  1- walad  (3sg.m)  - a  the- boy  - acc  - hu him(3.sg,m) 'He  h i t the boy./ He h i t him.'  (50)b. * daraba  pro  (51)a. la iba  f i - 1 - hadiqat - i  (  played(3.sg.m)in  - the garden  - gen  -ha it(3sg.f) 'He  p l a y e d i n the garden./He played i n i t '  (51)b. *  absorb  la iba (  f i - pro  37  V e r b s and case  p r e p o s i t i o n s a s s i g n a c c u s a t i v e case  respectively  assigned, should these  i t must be  a l s o be heads.  features h e a d of  under t h e a s s u m p t i o n  noted We  can  realized  t h a t the c l i t i c conclude  The  this  this  structure other that  under  blocks  PRO  the  the  assumption,  account  sentences  S i n c e we  can  be  explained  are assuming  from a p p e a r i n g  appear  in this  t h e v e r b and  identification  moves t o t h e  left  t o the  t h a t AGR  is  in Section  of p r o  right.  We  in order  participle  at  on  D-  the  Recall  the  rich  assigns  Case  f u r t h e r assume t h a t  as w e l l .  Thus  AGR  i t s features.  the verb  moves  (ie. identification  condition for i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  form a g r e e s  Three,  identify  AGR.  i s i l l u s t r a t e d by  and  to  to  a necessary  will  i s rightward  adjoining  r i c h agreement  Pro,  g o v e r n s and  t o a t t a c h t o the v e r b ,  This  the  by  to  clauses.  in  determined  has  subjects  the  subjects  governed p o s i t i o n .  S i n c e AGR  is  by  the  proceed  in subject position  t h a t AGR  of pro  can  embedded  INFL, as m e n t i o n e d e a r l i e r  s u b j e c t NP  That  we  for missing  as w e l l as  f e a t u r e s of p r o must be  a g r e e m e n t on to  to  identifies  t h e Case a s s i g n e d  s i n c e i t i s a governed p o s i t i o n .  hand can the  It  appear a t t a c h e d  t h a t the c l i t i c  this  subject property  f o l l o w i n g manner. generated  of  a n a l y s i s can  i n matrix  missing  may  (51)a.  phrase.  With the a d o p t i o n show how  genitive  t h a t whenever Case i s  i n ( 5 0 ) a . and  of p r o as w e l l as a b s o r b s the  objects  as  and  the p a r t i c i p l e i n number and  of p r o of  by  AGR)  missing  form o f  the  g e n d e r but  verb. not  in  38 person.  T h e r e f o r e , AGR  i s not r i c h enough to i d e n t i f y a  missing subject and the subject must be l e x i c a l as shown i n (52)b. (52)a. * pro going  Sahebuna (part,  pl.m)  (52) b. al-alwadu the boys going 'The That  Sahebuna  2  (patr.pl.m)  boys are going'  INFL i s adjacent to the verb i n surface form  our assumption element.  that the verb i n f a c t moves to the  If t h i s  i s t r u e , then AGR  a d j o i n i n g the verb.  supports AGR  never moves down  T h e r e f o r e , we can assume that i n matrix  sentences with m i s s i n g s u b j e c t s , AGR  as w e l l as verb  movement apply i n order to i d e n t i f y the f e a t u r e s of pro.  T h i s i s a l s o the case i n 'an' c l a u s e s , as i l l u s t r a t e d i n (53) : (53) arada  [_ an s  [ pro I NFL s  want(3sg.m) that  ya3haba ]]  go(3sg.m.subj.)  'He wanted to go' AGR  i s generated  i n a p o s i t i o n that governs the subject pro.  Although there i s no v e r b a l element i n t h i s sentence, we are assuming that the base order i s SVO and i n v o l v e s an empty c o p u l a . T h i s empty copula f u n c t i o n s as i t s overt counter part where AGR and verb preposing must apply to a s s i g n case to the s u b j e c t . The s u r f a c e word order i s VSO although i t does not show i t . 2  39 But  s i n c e we are assuming that the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of p r o i s  to the r i g h t , AGR must move to the l e f t of the subject position  i n order to i d e n t i f y  turn moves and a d j o i n s AGR. word order and  i t s features. This in fact  The verb i n  i s the r e q u i r e d  i n an 'an' c l a u s e s i n c e 'an' i s a mood a s s i g n e r  i t a s s i g n s the Subjunctive mood to the verb adjacent to  it. In 'anna' c l a u s e on the other hand, there i s o b l i g a t o r y presence  of a c l i t i c  when there i s a missing subject as i n  (54) : (54)a. amara  [-anna- h u [ p r o s  ordered(3sg.m)  that-he  I NFL  yaktubu ] 3  write(3sg.m.  indie).  'He ordered him to w r i t e . ' (54)b. * amara [.anna- Q[^pro  I NFL  yaktubu 3 3  Since we are assuming that the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of pro i s right  ward, AGR i n an 'anna' c l a u s e can not i d e n t i f y the  f e a t u r e s of pro.  Furthermore s i n c e 'anna' i s a Case  a s s i g n e r and i t a s s i g n s a c c u s a t i v e Case to the subject p o s i t i o n , a c c o r d i n g t o the Case R e a l i z a t i o n P r i n c i p l e  AGR  and verb preposing do not apply s i n c e we can not have case conflict.  The c l i t i c  i s then o b l i g a t o r y i n order t o  i d e n t i f y the f e a t u r e s of pro as w e l l as absorb a s s i g n e d by 'anna' (54)a. derivation not  the Case  Without the c l i t i c , the  i s ungrammatical s i n c e the f e a t u r e s of pro a r e  i d e n t i f i e d and the Case that 'anna' a s s i g n s i s not  40 realized  (54)b.  Further evidence in  to support  f a c t absorbs Case i s p r o v i d e d  clitic  the c l a i m that the  clitic  from examples where the  appears in 'anna' c l a u s e s together  with verb movement  as i n : (55)a. a ' r e f u [ anna- hu[ akala know- I t h a t - i t 'I  1-walad -u  ate(3sg.m)the boy-nom  know that the boy ate the  t-tufahat-a] the  ]  apple-acc  apple'  (55)b. * a'refu If  [ anna-hu [ 1-walad-  the c l i t i c  assigned  by  akala  appears as i s (55)a.,  'anna'.  t-tufahat-a  i t absorbs the Case  If verb movement does not apply  a s s i g n Case to the subject of the embedded c l a u s e , derivation  its  as i n (55)b.  Therefore  the  in the embedded c l a u s e i n order to a s s i g n Case to  s u b j e c t as i n  are r e l a t e d .  (55)a. cliticization  In f a c t , both d e a l with empty pronominal  positions f i l l e d  with pro.  The  i d e n t i f i e d under government.  f e a t u r e s of pro must  be  However, the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  of  i n subject p o s i t i o n d i f f e r s from when pro i s i n a  complement p o s i t i o n . only  the  verb movement i s  In summary, the pro-drop phenomena and  pro  to  i s ungrammatical as i t i s i n v i o l a t i o n of  Case f i l t e r obligatory  ] ]  i f the AGR  features.  Pro  i s permitted  in subject  position  element i s r i c h enough to i d e n t i f y i t s  In complement p o s i t i o n however, a c l i t i c  appear to i d e n t i f y  i t s features.  Thus c r o s s  must  linguistically,  41  there are two o p t i o n s to i d e n t i f y agreement or by a c l i t i c .  pro, e i t h e r by  rich  Furthermore, the c l i t i c  has an  a d d i t i o n a l f u n c t i o n , i t absorbs the Case a s s i g n e d by the head.  T h i s i s w e l l supported by i n s t a n c e s when the  clitic  appears as a ' s p e l l out' of the Case of the 'anna' complementizer.  In such a case INFL preposing as w e l l as  verb movement must apply to ensure that Case the  l e x i c a l s u b j e c t of the embedded c l a u s e .  i s a s s i g n e d to  V. In t h i s  final  WH-EXTRACTION.  Section,  we w i l l  discuss  of NP's from b o t h m a t r i x a n d embedded  clauses.  illustrating  the problem  distribution  o f c l i t i c s a n d empty c a t e g o r i e s  the  i n SA, we w i l l  proposed a n a l y s i s , given  the e x t r a c t i o n After  show how t h e f a l l s o u t from  t h e ECP and s e v e r a l  supported  assumptions.  A. THE PROBLEM Extraction applies in  freely,  Section  II.  o f noun p h r a s e s from m a t r i x s e n t e n c e s i n SA obeying the Subjacency c o n d i t i o n To  discussed  illustrate:  (56) man.  who  kataba  t.  d-dars- a  wrote(3sg.m) t h e l e s s o n - a c c 'Who w r o t e t h e l e s s o n ? '  (57) ma5a  kataba  1-walad- u  t  i  i  what wroteOsg.m) t h e boy -nom 'What d i d t h e boy w r i t e ? ' Extraction post  o f noun p h r a s e s  from o b j e c t  v e r b a l p o s i t i o n i n embedded  freely: (58)  42  p o s i t i o n , i e . from  clauses,  also  applies  43 ma3a. i  a r a d a 1-mudarres-u  [.an i  what  wanted t h e t e a c h e r - n o m 'What d i d t h e t e a c h e r  [ yaktub-a s  that  t-elmi5  write-subj  want t h e s t u d e n t  the  - u t.] ] 1  student-nom  to write?'  (59) mI3a.  arada  1-mudarres -u  whatiwanted  theteacher-nom  [ anna that  [ t-elmi3  -a  --thestudent-acc  y a k t u b u - t j ]] write-indic. 'What d i d t h e t e a c h e r  Extraction depending clause.  on  want t h e s t u d e n t  of the s u b j e c t  to write?'  f r o m embedded c l a u s e s  the complementizer  that  E x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t  introduces  differs  t h e embedded  o f an  'an' c l a u s e  applies  [ yaktub-a s  t. d - d a r s -a i  ] ]  freely: (60) man. a r a d a 1 - l m u d a r r e s e - u i who  wanted  theteacher-nom  'Who  Extraction other of  that write-subj  d i d the teacher  of the s u b j e c t  want  from an  to write  'anna'  hand, r e q u i r e s an o b l i g a t o r y c l i t i c  t h e moved s u b j e c t  derivation (61)a.  [.an s  NP.  I f no c l i t i c  i s ungrammatical.  (61)  thelesson-acc the  lesson?'  c l a u s e , on t o appear  appears, the  illustrates  this:  the in place  44  man  arada 1-mudarres - u fanna-hu  F yaktub-u  who  wanted  write-indic.  theteacher-nomthat-he  d-dars-a]] the l e s s o n - a c c 'Who  d i d the teacher want to w r i t e the l e s s o n ? '  (61)b. * man  B. THE  arada 1-mudarres-uj^anna  j^yaktub-u  d-dars-a  SOLUTION  To e x p l a i n t h i s d i s t i n c t the s u b j e c t of an  behavior of the e x t r a c t i o n of  'anna' c l a u s e , we w i l l r e l y on the  proposed analyses of word order and c l i t i c s as w e l l as the Empty Category P r i n c i p l e The ECP governed. Roughly  (ECP).  r e q u i r e s that every t r a c e must be p r o p e r l y  A t r a c e i s e i t h e r a v a r i a b l e or an NP  trace.  speaking, an empty c a t e g o r y i s p r o p e r l y governed i f  1) i t i s a complement of a head such as V, N, P, or 2) i t i s coindexed with a l o c a l antecedent.  Proper government i s  f o r m a l l y d e f i n e d by Chomsky (1981:250) as: (62) a p r o p e r l y governs/3  i f and only i f a governs  0and  [a#AGR]  ECP  In GB,  : [a e ]  must be p r o p e r l y governed.  an empty category i s a v a r i a b l e i f and only i f i t i s  45 Case marked and bound by an operator i n COMP p o s i t i o n , i . e . it  i s A-bound.  An NP-trace,  an argument, i e . A-bound.  on the other hand, i s bound by Since SA does not have r a i s i n g  verbs such as verb the 'seem' which allow the t r a c e to be bound by an argument, our d i s c u s s i o n of t r a c e s w i l l be l i m i t e d to v a r i a b l e s o n l y .  To  illustrate:  (63) man  i  'who  qara'a  t  i  read?'  (64) al-walad-u  qara'a t i  i  'The boy read.'  The t r a c e s i n (63) and (64) are A bound by the WH element and  the Topic r e s p e c t i v e l y .  In both d e r i v a t i o n s , the t r a c e  i s p r o p e r l y governed by the verb.  Thus, the ECP i s  satisfied. The ECP i s formulated to apply to t r a c e s but not to PRO as PRO has f e a t u r e s and thus i s not an empty category. allows d e r i v a t i o n s such as: (65) I dont't know [ what  [ PRO i  to do  t ] ] i  This  46 In  (65).the t r a c e , t, i s p r o p e r l y  Thus the ECP  governed, but  as w e l l as the binding  PRO  conditions  i s not.  are  satisf ied.  On  the other hand,an E n g l i s h sentence such as the  is  ungrammatical:  following  (66) * Bill  was  preferred  [ for [ t  i Since  a proper governor, t h e r f o r e the  the movement i s not  If we like  in a properly  i s r u l e d out  the e x t r a c t i o n of the t r a c e which i s not  subject  properly The  of  'anna' c l a u s e s  assume that the c l i t i c  'anna' c l a u s e  and  i s extracted  govern the t r a c e , as i l l u s t r a t e d  leaves of  a  the  i s a proper  i n order  to  in (61)a.  assumption that c l i t i c s are proper governors i s  (68)  from other - s t r u c t u r e s .  are examples of the e x t r a c t i o n of complements  from p r e p o s i t i o n a l phrases of c o n s t r u c t (67)a.  is  below, i t must appear when  supported by"evidence of e x t r a c t i o n s (67)  the  a proper governor, then  governed, a v i o l a t i o n  (Borer 0 984)) and  of an  governed p o s i t i o n and  'anna' complementizer i n SA  subject  properly  t r a c e of  ECP.  i e . i s not  Futhermore, i f we  governor i n SA the  by the  assume that the  ' f o r ' in E n g l i s h ,  ECP.  ] ]  i  ' f o r ' i s not  derivation  to have seen Tom  state  structures.  47 man.  sallama  i  who  1-mudarresu- u ' a l a y - h i . i  shook hands the teacher-nom with-him  'Whom d i d the teacher shake hands with?'  (67)b. * man  sallama  1-mudarres-  (  ala  (68)a. man  rama  1-walad-u  kitaba-hu  i  i  who  threw  the boy-nom book-acc-his  'Whose book d i d the boy throw?' (68)b. * man  rama  1-walad-u  kitaba  (67) and (68), show that p r e p o s t i o n s as w e l l as nouns can not f u n c t i o n as proper governors. the c l i t i c  Only the a v a i l a b i l i t y of  makes e x t r a c t i o n p o s s i b l e  (67)a. and (67)b. I t  must be the case, then, that the c l i t i c p r o p e r l y govern  the t r a c e .  stranding result  functions to  Since both p r e p o s i t i o n and noun  i n ungrammaticality  (67)b. and (68)b., we  conclude that p r e p o s t i o n s and nouns are not proper as i s a l s o the case i n Hebrew.  Now c o n s i d e r the f o l l o w i n g  examples: (69)  governors  man r a ' a t i i who saw(3sg.m.) 'Whom d i d he see?'  48  (70) ma3a what  i  kataba  t  i wrote(3sg.m)  'What d i d he w r i t e ? ' (69) and  (70) do not r e q u i r e a c l i t i c  p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e .  to appear  i n order to  From t h i s we can assume that  only verbs, are proper governors i n SA.  (Since a d j e c t i v e s  do not take bare NP complements, we can g e n e r a l i z e t h i s to the  feature  clitic and  [+V]).  Furthermore, s i n c e the appearance  of the  r e g u l a r i z e s the d e r i v a t i o n as shown i n (61)a., (67)  (68), we w i l l assume that the c l i t i c  i s coindexed with  the empty p o s i t i o n in order to p r o p e r l y govern i t .  To  capture these f a c t s we w i l l adopt the d e f i n i t i o n of proper government proposed by Borer  (1984:71):  (71 ) a  p r o p e r l y governs 0 i f f a  governs 0  (i)  a i s [ +V  (ii)  a i s coindexed with 0.  Now,  and  ] or  with these assumptions we w i l l  i l l u s t r a t e how  the  proposed a n a l y s i s accounts f o r the e x t r a c t i o n of noun phrases from matrix and embedded c l a u s e s . WH-extraction of o b j e c t s from matrix sentences f o l l o w s automatically  from the p r e v i o u s l y s t a t e d assumptions.  e x t r a c t i o n of the object would leave the t r a c e  Since  properly  governed by the verb, the d e r i v a t i o n w i l l not v i o l a t e the ECP, e.g.  (57), (69), and (70).  49  For e x t r a c t i o n of the subject, r e c a l l that AGR  as w e l l as verb preposing  apply  Case assignment of a l e x i c a l s u b j e c t .  from S e c t i o n III  f o r the purpose of  Since v a r i a b l e s are  Case marked, we have to assume that e x t r a c t i o n of  the  s u b j e c t from matrix  verbal  position.  sentences a p p l i e s from a post  Movement i s p e r m i s s i b l e s i n c e the t r a c e i s  p r o p e r l y governed by the verb as in (56) and  (63).  E x t r a c t i o n of noun phrases from embedded c l a u s e s obeys Subjacency as d i s c u s s e d  in Section I I , and  follows this  a n a l y s i s i n the same manner as e x t r a c t i o n from sentences.  matrix  E x t r a c t i o n of the object i s p e r m i s s i b l e s i n c e  the t r a c e i s p r o p e r l y governed by the verb of the embedded c l a u s e as i s (58) and  (59).  E x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an  'an' c l a u s e a p p l i e s  in the same mannner as e x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t of sentences.  Since  matrix  i t a p p l i e s from a p o s t - v e r b a l p o s i t i o n ,  f o r reasons d i s c u s s e d above, the t r a c e does not v i o l a t e  the  ECP.  as  I t i s governed by the verb of the embedded c l a u s e  i l l u s t r a t e d by The  (60).  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject of an  the other hand, i s t r e a t e d d i f f e r e n t l y .  'anna' c l a u s e , on R e c a l l that  i s a Case a s s i g n e r a s s i g n i n g a c c u s a t i v e Case to the in i t s c l a u s e . preposing.  T h i s does not t r i g g e r AGR  and  'anna' subject  verb  Hence, e x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an  c l a u s e must apply  from a p r e - v e r b a l p o s i t i o n .  T h i s leaves a  t r a c e not p r o p e r l y governed i n v i o l a t i o n of ECP. subject e x t r a c t i o n from an  'anna' c l a u s e to be  'anna'  For  grammatical,  50 then a c l i t i c  must appear to p r o p e r l y  by movement as i n (61)a.  govern the t r a c e  left  Otherwise the d e r i v a t i o n i s  ungrammatical i n v i o l a t i o n of the ECP as i n (61)b. The  proposed a n a l y s i s a l s o p r e d i c t s that the c l i t i c  must be a s s o c i a t e d consider  with an empty c a t e g o r y .  the f o l l o w i n g  To i l l u s t r a t e ,  examples:  (72) *man arada 1-mudarres- u [.anna-hu [l-waladwho  wanted  theteacher-nom that-he  yaktub-u  theboy w r i t e - i n d i c .  d-darrsa-a] ] the  lesson  (73) *man arada who  1-mudarres-u  £_an £ yaktuba-hu  wanted the teacher-nom that w r i t e - i t  d-darrsJJ the l e s s o n  (74)  *ma3a  what  If  arada  wanted  the c l i t i c  almudarres-u |\an j" yaktuba-hu  the teacher  that  appears attached  write-it  Therefore,  c o u l d be e x p l a i n e d  JJ  the boy-nom  t o a head of a phrase, i t  i n d i c a t e s that t h i s head i s a s s o c i a t e d category.  alwalad-u  with an empty  the u n g r a m m a t i c a l l y of (72) and (73)  i n the f o l l o w i n g manner.  I f the c l i t i c  appears as w e l l a l e x i c a l category, the P r o j e c t i o n P r i n c i p l e and  the 0- c r i t e r i o n w i l l be v i o l a t e d s i n c e the empty  51 p o s i t i o n , the t r a c e and the l e x i c a l element are a s s i g n e d one ©-role.  Furthermore, s i n c e the the c l i t i c  absorbs the case  assigned by the head, the l e x i c a l element w i l l not be assigned Case  i n v i o l a t i o n of the Case f i l t e r .  ungrammatical  since the c l i t i c  governed In the  (74) i s a l s o  appears i n a p r o p e r l y  position. summary, the proposed a n a l y s i s c o r r e c t l y  subject e x t r a c t i o n p o s s i b i l i t i e s  E x t r a c t i o n of the subject require a c l i t i c  predicts  from embedded c l a u s e s .  from an 'an' c l a u s e does not  to appear.  In f a c t  renders the sentence ungrammatical.  ifa clitic  appears, i t  On the other hand,  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an 'anna' c l a u s e r e q u i r e s a clitic  t o appear  i n order to p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e .  Thus, t h i s a n a l y s i s accounts f o r the f o l l o w i n g  paradigm:  (75) Subject e x t r a c t i o n from an 'an' c l a u s e .  (a)  *'an' without verb movement.  (b) *'an' without verb movement, with a c l i t i c . (c)  *'an' with verb movement, with a c l i t i c .  (d) 'an' with verb movement.  (76) Subject e x t r a c t i o n from an 'anna' c l a u s e .  (a)  *'anna' without verb movement.  (b) 'anna' without verb movement, with c l i t i c . (c)  *'anna' with verb movement.  52 (d) 'anna' with verb movement, with  clitic  If s u b j e c t e x t r a c t i o n takes p l a c e from a p r e - v e r b a l p o s i t i o n as i n (75)a. and Case marked.  The  (75)b.,  not appear attached  Furthermore, the c l i t i c to 'an'  s i n c e 'an'  and must be f o l l o w e d by a verb. to the verb  p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e . v i o l a t i o n of the In ( 7 5 ) c ,  i n (75)b.  be  be  Therefore  is  can  i s a mood a s s i g n e r  If the c l i t i c  i t will  however,  in no p o s i t i o n to  the d e r i v a t i o n i s i n  ECP. e x t r a c t i o n from a p o s t - v e r b a l p o s t i o n  the t r a c e p r o p e r l y governed. a c o n f i g u r a t i o n of proper ungrammaticality  not  t r a c e i s a l s o not p r o p e r l y governed and  in v i o l a t i o n of ECP.  appears attached  the v a r i a b l e w i l l  I f the c l i t i c  leaves  a l s o appears i n  government, t h i s r e s u l t s in the  of the d e r i v a t i o n .  In (75)d. on the other hand, the e x t r a c t i o n i s from a p r o p e r l y governed p o s i t i o n .  The  p r o p e r l y governed, obeying ECP  t r a c e which i s l e f t i s  and  the d e r i v a t i o n i s  grammatical. In (76)a, e x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t of the  'anna'  c l a u s e leaves a t r a c e that i s not p r o p e r l y governed s i n c e 'anna' i s not a proper  governor.  e x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t of the  T h i s v i o l a t e s the ECP. 'anna' c l a u s e takes  and  the the c l i t i c  and  the d e r i v a t i o n i s grammatical as i n  place  appears, i t p r o p e r l y governs the t r a c e ,  E x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an  (76)b. 'anna' c l a u s e ,  verb movement, leaves a t r a c e p r o p e r l y governed.  with  However,  If  53  the Case a s s i g n e d by 'anna' i s not absorbed, hence, the derivation  i s ungrammatical  as i n (76)c.  In (76)d.,  e x t r a c t i o n of the s u b j e c t , w i t h verb movement, l e a v e s the t r a c e p r o p e r l y governed by the verb. a s s i g n e d by derivation  Furthermore, the Case  'anna' i s absorbed by the c l i t i c . i s grammatical.  The  CONCLUSION It has i s an SVO  been argued i n t h i s paper that Standard A r a b i c  language r a t h e r than a VSO.  With t h i s  word order grammatical r e l a t i o n s are expressed c o n s t i t u e n t s t r u c t u r e and matrix  underlying  by  their  Case assignment of the s u b j e c t s of  sentences and embedded c l a u s e s i s u n i f i e d .  order a c c o r d i n g  VSO  word  to t h i s a n a l y s i s i s d e r i v e d by verb movement  s i n c e government and Case assignment i s assumed to apply only to the r i g h t , t h i s f o r c e s agreement and  verb  to a p p l y .  by  VSO  surface word order  i s derived  preposing  Topicalization. It  has a l s o been argued t h a t c l i t i c s always appear  empty c a t e g o r i e s .  They must appear to i d e n t i f y the  with  features  of t h i s empty pronominal pro as w e l l as absorb the Case assigned  by the head.  c l i t i c s may  Furthermore, i t has  appear as a r e s u l t  p r o p e r l y govern the l e f t Now,  the c l i t i c  s u b j e c t of an  of movement i n order  trace violating  appearing  been argued that  ECP.  i n the e x t r a c t i o n of  the  'anna' c l a u s e f o l l o w n a t u r a l l y from the  proposed a n a l y s i s .  Since  'anna' i s a Case a s s i g n e r and i t  must a s s i g n i t s Case a c c o r d i n g P r i n c i p l e , AGR  to the Case R e a l i z a t i o n  and verb p r e p o s i n g  have a c o n f l i c t  may  not apply  so as not  to  i n the assignment of Case to the s u b j e c t in  the embedded c l a u s e .  Thus, e x t r a c t i o n of the subject  a t r a c e not p r o p e r l y governed i n v i o l a t i o n of ECP. must then appear i n order by movement.  to  The  A  to p r o p e r l y govern the t r a c e  e x t r a c t i o n of the subject from an 54  leaves clitic left  'an'  55 c l a u s e , on the other hand, apply p o s i t i o n s i n c e AGR  from a p r o p e r l y governed  and verb preposing  f o r the s u b j e c t to be assigned Case. p r o p e r l y governed by the verb.  The  must apply  i n order  T h i s leaves a t r a c e clitic  does not  appear  s i n c e i t i s a p r o p e r l y governed c o n f i g u r a t i o n . In c o n c l u s i o n , the adoption the GB  of the t h e o r e t i c a l t o o l s of  framework f a c i l i t a t e s the a n a l y s i s of  r e l e v a n t f e a t u r e s of A r a b i c syntax. the d i s t i n c t  behavior  embedded c l a u s e s i n SA distinction  various  T h i s not only  explains  in the e x t r a c t i o n of the subject i n a u n i f i e d manner, but  from  this  i s i n f a c t p r e d i c t e d by the proposed a n a l y s i s .  BIBLIOGRAPHY Aoun,  J.  (1979b) "On Government,  P l a c e m e n t , " mimeographed, Aoun,  J.  J.  Linguistics,  H.  MIT  MIT Working  Papers  in  on t h e P r o - D r o p Phenomena."  Linguistics,  (1981) " P a r a m e t r i c  Volume  Variation  Constructions," Dissertation, Borer,  H.  (1981) "On E x t r a c t i o n  C o n s t r u c t i o n , " NELS Borer,  H.  Morris Halle,  Chomsky, N. Theory  from C l i t i c  Doubled  Foris;  Dordrecht.  (eds.).  Holt, Reinhart  2:  A F e s t s c h r i s p to  and W i n s t o n : New of  York.  Grammar,"  303-351.  (1972) "On WH-movement," i n P.W.  P r e s s : New  Foris,  MIT.  Syntax",  Kiparsky  Analysis  Wasow and A.  Chomsky, N.  MIT.  in C l i t i c  (1976) " C o n d i t i o n s on R u l e s  Linguistic  Chomsky, N.  2,  MIT  (1973) " C o n d i t i o n s on T r a n s f o r m a t i o n s . " i n  A n d e r s o n and P.  Chomsky, N.  in  11: 22-37.  (1981) "Parametric  Chomsky, N.  Papers  4:1-4.  (1981) "Comments  Working  Borer,  Linguistic  12: 637-644.  (1982) " E x p l e t i v e PRO'S."  B o r e r , H.  Clitic  MIT.  (1980A) "ECP, Move and S u b j a c e n c y . "  Inquiry Aoun,  Case Marking and  A k m a j i a n ( e d s . ) , Formal  C u l i c o v e r , T.  Syntax,  Academic  York.  (1981)  "Lectures  on  Government  and  Binding"  Dordrecht. (1981) of  Gover  "Some Concepts nment  and  and  Binding,"  Cambridge.  56  Consequences MIT  Press:  of  the  57 Chomsky, N. and L a s n i k Linguistic  (1977) " F i l t e r s  Inquiry  8:  Haywood, J.A./Nahmed H.M. the  Written  H u r t a d o , A.  Control,"  425-504.  (1970)  Language,"  "A New  Arabic  Grammar  of  Lund H u m p h r i r e s , London.  ( t o appear) " C l i t i c  (ed.)  and  Chains"  i n A.  Hurtado  L i n g u i s t i c T h e o r y and S p a n i s h S y n t a x .  Reidel:  Dordrecht. Kayne, R.S. 12:  Inquiry,  93-134.  K e n s t o w i c z , M. Arabic Koopman H.  (1984) "The N u l l S u b j e c t  D i a l e c t s , " NELS (1985)  For i s ,  "Verb  P a r a m e t e r i n Modern  14:207-219.  Movement  in  the  Kru  Languages,"  Dordrecht.  R o b e r g e , Y. Null  Linguistic  (1981) "ECP E x t e n s i o n s . "  (1985) " S u b j e c t Agreement  Doubling, Free  Inversion  and  L a n g u a g e s , " CLA M e e t i n g , U n i v e r s i t y  de  Montreal. Rizzi  L.  (1978b) " V i o l a t i o n o f WH.  Italian  and t h e S u b j a c e n c y C o n d i t i o n , "  D u b i s s o n , D. Montreal  Sportiche,  Linguistic  S p r o a t , R.  Lightfoot  Working  D.  Papers  and Y.C. in  (1981) " B o u n d i n g Nodes Review  (1983) "VSO  Stowell  in  i n C.  Morin  Linguistics  (eds.), 11 : 155-190.  i n French."  The  1 : 219-246.  L a n g u a g e s a n d Welsh  Conf i g u r a t i o n a l i t y , " MIT Working MIT  Island Constraint  Papers  in  Linguistics  5:243-276.  (1981) " O r i g i n s  paper.  of Phrase S t r u c t u r e s " .  Unpublished  58 Torrego, E.  (1984) "On I n v e r s i o n i n Spanish and Some of I t s  Effects." Wright, W.  Linguistic  (1971)  Cambridge  Inquiry  "A Grammar  University  15: 103-129.  of the Arabic  Press,  London.  Language,"  INDEX AN ALTERNATIVE AN OVERVIEW  19  OF THE GB FRAMEWORK, 4  BIBLIOGRAPHY, CLITICS,  ANALYSIS,  56  29  CONCLUSION,  54  INTRODUCTION,  1  PRO-DROP ANALYSIS,  28  PRO-DROP PHENOMENA AND CLITICS., THE GB FRAMEWORK,  27  4  THE PROBLEM, 42 THE RULE SYSTEM, 5 THE SOLUTION,  44  THE SYSTEM OF PRINCIPLES,  7  VSO ANALYSIS, 18 WH-EXTRACTION., 4 2 WORD-ORDER AND CASE ASSIGNMENT,  59  18  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0096473/manifest

Comment

Related Items