A cartographic approach to embedded word order in Jordanian Arabic

Abstract

This paper investigates marked and unmarked word order patterns in embedded clauses in Jordanian Arabic (JA), motivating a mono-clausal analysis of them. It shows that ‘topic’ in this Arabic dialect is not a unique category, nor susceptible to a single analysis, hence providing support for proposals that argue for topics typology. For instance, topics that express information that is newly introduced, newly changed or newly returned to, i.e. Aboutness Topic, are shown not to be licensed in JA embedded clauses. On the other hand, the study argues that topics that convey familiar information, i.e. Familiar Topic, are more constrained in embedded contexts than previously believed; they are not recursive. Such a state of affairs implies that there are no elements being assigned the same informational/communicative value in the left periphery of JA embedded clauses.

Grammatical Encoding of Discourse Structure: A Case Study of The Arabic Discourse Particle Tara

“…5 All-new utterances are mostly divided into a subject-predicate type in JA, as our data show. In all answers to outof-the-blue questions in our corpus, speakers use SVO utterances which are typical of subject-predicate constructions in JA (see Jarrah 2019). This is also consistent with the generally held view that new information in natural languages tends to remain in situ and is not syntactically marked (i.e.…”

“…Our analysis, which assumes that when the relevant utterance is all‐new, it remains in situ (and does not move to [Spec, SDPhrase]) is consistent with the related literature that new information is not syntactically marked and remains in situ as long as it is not contrastively interpreted (see Mouaouakal 1989; Ouhalla 1997; Jarrah 2019). In contrast, an all‐given utterance moves to [Spec, SDPhrase] in order to anchor it to the speaker, generating the interpretation that the whole utterance represents given information that the hearer is familiar with from the viewpoint of the speaker.…”

Narrow-syntax and post-spellout movements: evidence from the syntax of idiomatic expressions in Arabic varieties

“…It has been proposed that the subject in JA raises to Spec,TP due to the strong EPP feature in this language (see Jarrah, 2017 for motivation and analysis). This proposal is supported by the observation that the preverbal subject in JA should not be accompanied by a certain informational value (unlike the case in MSA where the subject in SVO clauses should be definite or accompanied with a contrastive intonation; see Moutaouakil, 1989); the subject in JA might be an indefinite, nonspecific entity (Jarrah, 2019b). As for the verb, it has been proposed that the verb moves to adjoin T 0 as is the case in MSA (Jarrah, 2019b).…”

“…The presence of ka:n does not cancel idiomatic readings of VP, as shown in the following examples. In the examples in ( 18), the verb is believed not to raise to T 0 as the latter is lexically supported by ka:n (see Jarrah, 2017Jarrah, , 2019b.…”

Complementizer Agreement in Jordanian Arabic is Agree-based: Evidence from Fronted Objects

“…Another group of researchers suggest that CLLD involves movement of the CLLDed expression to the left-periphery (Aoun and Benmamoun 1998;Aoun et al 2010;Jarrah 2019a). 4 Case assignment has featured as one important test in previous studies on the structural status of CLLDed elements and focus-fronted elements in Arabic.…”