case in standard arabic: a dependent case approach amer ahmed a dissertation submitted to the ...

307 Pages·2016·1.85 MB·English

by  Amer Ahmed

CASE IN STANDARD ARABIC: A DEPENDENT CASE APPROACH

AMER AHMED

A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO
THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

GRADUATE PROGRAM IN LINGUISTICS AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS
YORK UNIVERSITY
TORONTO, ONTARIO

August 2016

© AMER AHMED, 2016
ABSTRACT

This dissertation is concerned with how structural and non-structural cases are assigned
in the variety of Arabic known in the literature as Standard Arabic (SA). Taking a Minimalist
perspective, this dissertation shows that the available generative accounts of case in SA are
problematic either theoretically or empirically. It is argued that these problems can be overcome
using the hybrid dependent case theory of Baker (2015).
This theory makes a distinction between two types of phases. The first is the hard phase,
which disallows the materials inside from being accessed by higher phases. The second is the
soft phase, which allows the materials inside it to be accessed by higher phases.
The results of this dissertation indicate that in SA (a) the CP is a hard phase in that noun
phrases inside this phase are inaccessible to higher phases for the purpose of case assignment. In
contrast, vP is argued to be a soft phase in that the noun phrases inside this phase are still
accessible to higher phases for the purposes of case assignment (b) the DP, and the PP are also
argued to be hard phases in SA, (c) case assignment in SA follows a hierarchy such that lexical
case applies before the dependent case, the dependent case applies before the Agree-based case
assignment, the Agree-based case assignment applies before the unmarked/default case
assignment, (d) case assignment in SA is determined by a parameter, which allows the dependent
case assignment to apply to a noun phrase if it is c-commanded by another noun phrase in the
same Spell-Out domain (TP or VP), (e) the rules of dependent case assignment require that the
NPs involved have distinct referential indices.
The major conclusion of the dissertation is that the functional head v in SA is a soft phase
head, due to its deficient ɸ-specification. That is why it is incapable of establishing an Agree
ii
relation with the object and assigning the structural accusative case to it. The structural
accusative case on the object is, therefore, always the result of the dependent case mechanism.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

There are a number of people who contributed in one way or another to this thesis. First, I would
like to thank my thesis supervisor, Dr. Gabriela Alboiu of York University for reading previous
versions of this manuscript and providing feedback. Her contribution to the ideas expressed in
this thesis is much appreciated.
Second, I would like to thank Dr. Ruth King of York University for her input on a
previous version of this manuscript. I would also like to thank Dr. Philipp Angermeyer and Dr.
Amila Buturovic of York University for their feedback on an earlier version of this thesis.
Third, a very special thank you should go to Dr. Arsalan Kahnemuyipour of the
University of Toronto for his meticulous comments on earlier versions of this thesis. His
insightful comments have greatly helped improve the quality of this thesis.
Fourth, a very big thank you is due to Dr. Youssef Haddad of the University of Florida
for agreeing to be the external examiner of my PhD thesis committee and for his insightful
comments on an earlier version of this thesis.
Fifth, Dr. Usama Soltan of Middlebury College was always there when I had questions
about his PhD work on Standard Arabic syntax. Never once did he fail to respond to my
questions. He is by all standards a role model for all scholars in the field of academia.
Sixth, Dr. Dinha Tobiya Gorgis of the Defence Language Institue has always been there
fore me both when I needed answers to some of my questions about Standard Arabic and when I
needed emotional support. He was the first person who started me thinking about linguistic
issues. He is truly a Godfather, a dedicated defender of science, an excellent educator and teacher
and a great moral figure in my life.
Seventh, Dr. Rashid Al-Balushi of Sultan Qabuus University kindly responded to my
questions about his PhD work on the syntax of case in Standard Arabic. Another thank you for
Dr. Fassi Fehri of Mohammed V University for kindly responding to one of my e-mails.
Eighth, a word of thanks should also go to Dr. Elizabeth Ritter of the University of
Calgary, Dr. Elizabeth Cowper and Dr. Diane Massam of the University of Toronto and Dr.
Martha McGinnes of the University of Victoria, Matthew A. Tucker of NYU Abu Dhabi
University, and Dr. Tue Trinh of the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee for their valuable input
on some of the ideas expressed in this thesis, which were presented in a number of linguistic
conferences both in Canada and in the States.
I would like to end with a very big thank you to Noam Chomsky. It was through some of
his words about science that I started seriously entertaining the idea of doing a PhD in theoretical
Linguistics. His words, “Science is tentative, explorative, questioning, and largely learned by
doing.” (Chomsky Rationality/science: 91), have an everlasting impact on me.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract ........................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgment .......................................................................................................................... iv
Table of contents ..............................................................................................................................v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... viii
Abbreviations used in glosses ....................................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1: Introduction ...................................................................................................................1

Chapter 2: Case in generative grammar…………………………………………………………...6
2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 6
2.2 On binding (Chomsky 1980)………………………………………………………………... 6
2.3 The Government and Binding (GB) approach to case……………………………………… 10
2.4 Case in Early Minimalism…………………………………………………………………... 14
2.5 Case in later Minimalism……………………………………………………………………. 16
2.6 Refinements to case theory…………………………………………………………………. 19
2.6.1 On two types of nonstructural cases (Woolford 2006)………………………………….. 19
2.6.2 On default case (Schütze 2001)…………………………………………………………. 24
2.7 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………..27

Chapter 3: Introduction to SA and previous accounts of case…………………………………...28
3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..28
3.2 The syntax of SA: A brief overview…………………………………………………………28
3.3 Case in Medieval Arabic grammar…………………………………………………………..39
3.4 Previous generative accounts of case in SA…………………………………………………47
3.4.1 Agree-based accounts of case in SA……………………………………………………….48
3.4.2 A mixed approach to case (Fassi Fehri 1993)……………………………………………...79
3.5 The proposed account………………………………………………………………………..86
3.6 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………..88

Chapter 4: Alternate accounts of case with a focus on Baker’s dependent case theory and
relavant theoretical assumptions…………………………………………………………………89
4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………..89
4.2 Alternative accounts of case: The Case Tier theory…………………………………………89
4.2.1 Problems with the Case Tier theory………………………………………………………100
4.3 The proposed account of case for SA………………………………………………………105
4.3.1 The original version of dependent case (Marantz 1991)…………………………………105
4.3.1.1 Problems with the original version of dependent case theory………………………….114
4.3.2 The updated version of dependent case (Baker 2015)……………………………………116
4.3.3 Theoretical assumptions…………………………………………………………………..131
4.3.4 The rules of dependent case assignment………………………………………………….135
4.3.5 The preverbal position is a subject position………………………………………………138
4.3.6 Nominative is the unmarked/default case in SA………………………………………….145
4.4 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………....146

v
Chapter 5: Case assignment of core arguments in Standard Arabic…………………………… 147
5.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 147
5.2 vP is a soft phase in SA……………………………………………………………………..147
5.3 Case assignment in simple transitive sentences……………………………………………. 150
5.4 Case assignment in simple intransitive sentences………………………………………….. 151
5.5 Case assignment in sentences with double object constructions…………………………... 154
5.6 Case assignment in sentences introduced by the indicative (emphatic or neutral)
Complementizer……………………………………………………………………………….. 162
5.7 Case assignment in sentences with backgrounding encliticized topics……………………. 168
5.8 Case assignment in sentences with existential constructions……………………………… 169
5.9 Case assignment in sentences with believe-type predicates……………………………….. 176
5.10 Case assignment in sentences with control structures……………………………………. 185
5.11 Case assignment in sentences with adjectival/nominal predicates……………………….. 193
5.12 Case assignment in passive sentences……………………………………………………. 200
5.13 Case assignment in imperative sentences………………………………………………… 202
5.14 Case assignment in sentences with participials…………………………………………... 203
5.15 Case assignment in the PP domain……………………………………………………….. 211
5.16 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………..222

Chapter 6: Case assignment of non-arguments in SA………………………………………….224
6.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………... 224
6.2 The case assignment of adverbial NPs……………………………………………………. 224
6.3 Accusative case assignment of some other case-marked NPs……………………………...232
6.4 Case assignment of NPs in the left periphery of the clause……………………………….. 238
6.5 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………... 254

Chapter 7: Case assignment in the DP domain………………………………………………… 255
7.1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………… 255
7.2 Case assignment in simple DPs……………………………………………………………. 255
7.3 Case assignment in derived nominals……………………………………………………… 265
7.4 Testing Baker’s dependent case theory against the case tier theory and the Agree-based
theory of case: Evidence from strcutures with event-denoting nominals………………..275
7.5 Case assignment in structures with pronominal possessives………………………………. 278
7.6 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………… 280
Chapter 8: Conclusions………………………………………………………………………… 282
8.1 Conclusions..…………….………………………………………………………………….282
8.2 Future research……………………………………………………………………………...288
References……………………………………………………………………………………… 289

vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. The categories of case triggers in SA………………………………………….. 285

vii
ABBREVIATIONS USED IN GLOSSES

ABS Absolutive
ACC Accusative

DU Dual
COMP complementizer
CAUS Causative
CONJ conjunction
DAT dative
DEF Definite
EMPH Emphatic
ERG Ergative
F feminine
GEN genitive
IMP imperative
IMPF Imperfective
INDEF indefinite
INDIC Indicative
INF Infinitive
INSTR instrumental
JUSS Jussive
M masculine
NEG negative particle
NEUT Neutral
NOM nominative
PART Partitive
PASS Passive
PL plural
PRT particle
PTPL participle
Q question particle
SG singular
SUBJ subjunctive

viii
Case theory in Standard Arabic: A dependent case approach
Chapter One: Introduction
In this thesis, I address the issue of syntactic (structural and non-structural) as well as non-
syntactic (default and semantic) case in a variant usually known in the literature on Arabic as
Standard Arabic (SA).1 SA is a nominative-accusaive language, where the subject of transitives
and the subject of intransitives pattern together in contrast to the object. This alignment contrasts,
with other languages, ergative-absolutive languages, where the object of transitives and the
subject of intransitives pattern together in contrast to the subject of transitives. SA is the
language used exclusively as the medium of writing and orally in all forms of mass media in the
Arab World although it is mire coomon nowaydays to use a form of educated Spoken Arabic in
some programs (e.g. political shows or programs discussing social issues). Strictly speaking,
there are no native speakers of SA, as this is not the language that children in the Arab World
acquire from birth, but everyone is exposed to it from a very young age. However, Fassi Fehri
(1999: 21) argues that while SA is not a first language for the speakers of the modern variants of
Arabic, it is not a second language either, since the competence that speakers of the modern
variants of Arabic have of their particular variant of Arabic actually forms part of the
competence they develop later in SA. That is why, Fassi Fehri claims that SA is, for the speakers
of the modern varaints of Arabic, neither a first language nor a second language, but somewhere
in between. The main reason for choosing this dialect of Arabic instead of others is because this
variety of Arabic is the only one with morphological case. Throughout the thesis, I use my own
grammaticality judgments as an educated speaker of SA, as well as other sentences taken from

1 Througout the thesis, I use the lower case term case to cover both kinds of cases, syntactic and non-syntactic.
1
different written resources. A number of examples offered in the thesis are also taken from what
is sometimes known as Classical Arabic (CA) or Quranic Arabic, i.e. the Arabic variety that was
used between the 7th century and the 9th century, the time that spans the Ummayad and Abbasid
caliphates. This variety of Arabic was used by Medieval Arab tribes. These examples are also
documented in books that were written between the 8th century and the 13th century. I use these
examples because the syntactic structures they exhibit are still part of the syntax of SA.
According to Bateson (1967, as cited in Bin Muqbil 2006: 15), “M[odern]SA is a descendant of
CA and retains the basic syntactic, morphological, and phonological systems.” In terms of the
differences between the two, Bateson (1967, as cited in Bin Muqbil 2006: 15), states that “MSA
only uses a subset of the possible syntactic structures available in CA as well as a substantially
reduced lexicon.”
This thesis is written in the framework of the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995 and
subsequent work) as well as the dependent case theory of Baker (2015). The thesis addresses the
issue of case assignment in SA. In particular, the thesis attempts to answer the following
questions: (a) How are structural and non-structural cases assigned in this language? (b) What
theory can best account for the facts of case assignment in this language? (c) Do the available
Agree-based accounts of case actually explain the case facts of SA properly? Do accounts such
as that of Fassi Fehri (1993), which is grounded in the case tier theory of Yip, Maling and
Jackendoff (1987) fare better in explaining all the case facts of SA?
The major contribution of this thesis is to show that all the available accounts of case in
SA are problematic either theoretically or empirically. Specifically, the thesis shows the
following: (a) the available Agree-based accounts of case are problematic because they make the
wrong predictions when it comes to case assignment in DPs, where the head D is occupied by a
2