Dissolving the A/A-bar distinction: A feature inheritance based account of preverbal DP in NSLs

Alahdal, Ameen

doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2018.03.005

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since agreement checking in the current minimalist theory is done in a probe-goal fashion, there the subject DP does not move in order to check agreement with T. Further, entertaining a Spec-Head agreement configuration would raise the problem of why the subject does not move to TP in the VS order. 14 I would like to assume, following Alahdal (2018) that movement of the subject to Spec TP is triggered by EF on T. After all, the EF, the A-bar feature, is now on T, thanks to feature inheritance; EF has been inherited by T from C. Support for the approach proposed here comes from phonological phrasing. Samuels's (2012) puts forth the following typology of ϕ-domains.…”

Section: The Analysismentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Moreover, it has been proposed that both Spec,TP can be both an A-as well as A-bar position (e.g. Alahdal, 2018;Gallego, 2010).…”

Section: Base-generation Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recall that preverbal DP in null subject languages is thought to be a topic. In order to explain the fact that preverbal DP in Arabic SVO word order might have a topic interpretation, I would like to follow Alahdal (2018) who argues that SpecTP becomes an A-bar position when T inherits EF from C. For Alahdal, EF is similar to Rizzi's criterial features such as aboutness or Topic. In this case, the subject and T turn out to be spelled out in the same (CP) phase-hence overt full agreement.…”

Section: The Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here I follow Alahdal (2018) (referred to in the text) in assuming that the TP in Arabic is both A-as well as A-bar position.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A phase-based account of agreement asymmetry in Arabic

Alahdal

2021

Cogent Arts & Humanities

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers the well-known puzzling phenomenon of subjectverb agreement asymmetry in Arabic: full agreement surfaces in SV word order, whereas VS order manifests partial agreement. That is, agreement in all phifeatures surfaces only when the subject moves to a preverbal position. To avoid (apparently inevitable) circularity of earlier analyses, the paper offers a minimalist, phase-based analysis to the phenomenon. Two ingredients to the analysis are proposed: phase sliding, according to which a phase extends if its phase head moves. More precisely, T becomes a (sort of) phase head when after v-T movement. The other element is a morphological rule, Morphological Agreement Realization (MAR), to the effect that morphological agreement surfaces iff the probe and goal are spelled out in the same phase. Thus, it turns out that in VS word order, the subject and the verb are spelled out in different phases. In SV constructions, on the other hand, both the subject and the verb are spelled out in the same phase. Hence, the agreement asymmetry. The analysis is supported by certain phonological phenomena.

show abstract

Section: The Analysismentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Moreover, it has been proposed that both Spec,TP can be both an A-as well as A-bar position (e.g. Alahdal, 2018;Gallego, 2010).…”

Section: Base-generation Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here I follow Alahdal (2018) (referred to in the text) in assuming that the TP in Arabic is both A-as well as A-bar position.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations