On the quantified determiner phrase and quantifier float in Modern Standard Arabic

Abstract

This article provides a minimalist account to the morpho-syntax of the quantified D(eterminer) P(hrase) and quantifier float in Modern Standard Arabic. Having surveyed previous accounts, it proves that the prenominal structure is unmarked from which the postnominal is derived, and that the quantifier float is derived subsequently from the latter. The patterns are semantically similar. The pronominal clitic on the postnominal and floating quantifiers is a minimal copy left in the original merge position of the moved DP in the postnominal structure. The floating quantifier occupies the spec/vP position. When the subject DP undergoes movement to a preverbal position, the quantifier is left floating. When it is used with a transitive verb, the quantifier can occur after the object because the latter moves to an outer specifier of vP, across the quantifier position in spec/vP, to satisfy an EPP feature of the Light v.

Keywords:

• EPP feature
• minimalism
• Modern Standard Arabic
• resumptive pronoun
• quantified DP
• quantifier float

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. we assume, following Chomsky’s (2001, 2005) phase-based theory and feature inheritance, that Case on the subject is valued as nominative as a result of the Agree relation between C-T and the subject (Musabhien, 2008).

2. According to Musabhien (2008), object shift and scrambling in German is different from object movement in MSA in that the latter is not affected by definiteness, and both definite and indefinite objects undergo movement. Moreover, while shifting and scrambling affect unfocused objects, movement affects focused objects.

3. Unlike the wh-elements and the focused DPs which preserve their original (i.e., internally valued) case, and are not associated with a resumptive pronoun (Musabhien, 2008).

4. This phenomenon is also attested in MSA in the derivation of VSO word order (see Musabhien, 2008).

5. We assume, following Chomsky’s (2001, 2005) phase-based theory and feature inheritance, that Case on the subject is valued as nominative because of the Agree relation between C-T and the subject (Musabhien, 2008).

6. The VP-internal Subject Hypothesis of Koopman and Sportiche (1991) states that the subject originates within VP. The resulting VP is combined with a functional light head, which is merged with the external argument, resulting in a vP projection.

7. Our analysis assumes Chomsky’s (2001, 2005) work, and it assumes that object movement in MSA is an instance of A’ movement which is triggered by the edge feature on the head of the vP phase, i.e., v. The landing site of the moved object is the outer specifier of vP.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Khalid Lahbibi

Khalid Lahbibi is a Ph.D student at Choaib Dokkali University in El Jadida, Morocco. He is also an EFL teacher. His research intrests include syntax, first language acquisition, translation, and ELT.

Mohamed Yeou

Mohamed Yeou is a professor of linguistics at Choaib Dokkali University in El Jadida, Morocco. His research interests include experimental phonetics, speech science, lexicography, and ELT.