Cyclic Spell-Out Derived Agreement in Arabic Raising Constructions

Wurmbrand, Susi; Haddad, Youssef A.

doi:10.1075/sal.4.09wur

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While backward control is especially challenging for the PRO-based approach, the MTC provides a straightforward way to account for it. Assuming the MTC, according to which control and raising are derived in similar fashions, we first attempted to adapt Wurmbrand & Haddad's (2016) movement analysis of forward and backward raising in MSA to backward control. The difference between backward control and backward raising with regards to the agreement exhibited by the matrix predicate rendered a unified analysis of both constructions somewhat questionable and ad-hoc.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rather, the embedded subject does not move out of the embedded clause, but engages in long-distance agreement relations with the matrix predicate. 16 Nevertheless, "real" backward raising is argued by Wurmbrand & Haddad (2016) to be found in Standard Arabic. Thus, it is tempting to examine whether their analysis can be applied to the case of backward control.…”

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The alternating agreement in the backward pattern is a crucial factor in Wurmbrand & Haddad's (2016) analysis since it provides evidence for the structural effects of the position of the silent copy in the matrix clause. This, according to Polinsky & Potsdam (2006), is a necessary condition for "real" backward raising, as opposed to cases of long-distance agreement between the matrix and the embedded predicates, as is argued to occur in Modern Greek (Alexiadou et al 2012).…”

Section: A Movement Analysis Of Backward Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, we examine whether the backward control construction can shed light on the debate regarding control theory. More specifically, we consider whether, assuming the Movement Theory of Control (Hornstein 1999), Wurmbrand & Haddad's (2016) analysis of raising in MSA can be applied to backward control. Subsequently, in light of the differences between the two constructions and our findings regarding the distribution of the backward control construction, we propose an alternative analysis, which associates the backward coreference pattern in MSA with restructuring.…”

Section: Backward Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Seeking control in Modern Standard Arabic

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) has several embedded clause constructions, some of which resemble control in English (and other languages). However, these constructions exhibit some notable differences. Chief among them is the fact that the embedded verb carries agreement features that can indicate both coreference and disjoint reference between a matrix argument and the subject of the complement clause. Through a corpus-based investigation, informed by previous insights regarding the distinction between control and no control, we found no evidence of obligatory control predicates in MSA; these findings contradict accepted generalizations (and predictions) proposed by state-of-the-art theories of control. Nevertheless, although no obligatory control predicates were found, the backward pattern, where the single expressed subject occurs in the embedded clause, revealed morphosyntactic reflexes of the control vs. no control distinction. Coreference between the expressed embedded subject and the unexpressed matrix subject was found to be restricted to a set of predicates. The existence of backward control and its relation to the backward raising construction, also found in MSA, are especially relevant for current debates regarding the theory of control. We propose an analysis that ties together control, raising and restructuring.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Movement Analysis Of Backward Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Backward Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Seeking control in Modern Standard Arabic

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike upper T 0 , lower T 0 is unselected by C 0 . Assuming that T 0 is lexically specified for Φ‐features provides a solution of why the two T 0 's in multi‐Agree constructions can agree with the subject (of the main clause) (see also Wurmbrand and Haddad for a similar proposal for the presence of C 0 ‐independent Φ‐features on T 0 in MSA).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Complementizer Agreement and the T⁰‐Φ Parameter in Jordanian Arabic

Jarrah

2019

Studia Linguistica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contra Chomsky (2007, 2008), this paper argues that there is no Φ‐dependency between C0 and T0 in Jordanian Arabic (JA) grammar. C0 and T0 are independently endowed with uΦ‐content, something that turns them into active probes, which are shown to not necessarily agree with the same goal. This provides evidence for a proposal where T0 and C0 have distinct uΦ‐features (Haegeman & van Koppen 2012). The study also shows that C0 in JA, unlike T0, may agree with a goal whose structural Case is already valued. We account for this variation following Oxford's (2017) microparametric proposal where the Activity Condition is a property of a particular functional head, rather than a property of the language as a whole. With respect to T0's Φ‐endowment, this study proposes that such endowment is a consequence of setting a positive value of the postulated T0‐Φ Parameter, which distinguishes languages where T0 is endowed with Φ‐features from those where it is not. This accounts for the observation that T0 is always inflected for Φ‐agreement in JA, even in situations where C0 is not projected.

show abstract