Query Details
| Query Subject: |
Arabic: Yes/No Questions
|
|
| Author: | May Mahdi Al-Ramadan | |
| Submitter Email: | click here to access email | |
| Linguistic LingField(s): |
Syntax
Typology |
|
| Subject Language(s): |
Arabic, Standard
Arabic, Gulf |
|
| Query: |
My name is May Mahdi Al-Ramadan, from Saudi Arabia. I am a lecturer
and I am studying for a PhD in Applied Linguistics in King Saud University in Riyadh. I am working on a paper about the formation of Yes/No questions in Arabic. What interests me about this subject is the claim that I read in Carnie (2007) that complementizer particles and subject/verb inversion are in complementary distribution. He states that languages can either have this or that but not both. In Standard Arabic, a complementizer (Hal) is used at the beginning of yes/no questions. The verb precedes the subject in Standard Arabic in both sentences and questions. An example for this is as follows: 1) Hal thahaba abouka? C went father-your "Did your father go?" In Saudi Arabic, on the other hand, the complementizer is dropped. Subject/verb inversion is used instead. An example: 2) Obouk raH? Father-your went "Did your father go?" My question is that, how is it possible to incorporate the view that complementizers vs. subject/verb inversion are in complementary distribution into the analysis of Arabic that obviously has both methods of forming questions? Or possibly is it more valid to assume that the two varieties of Arabic are distinct and no generalization can be made with reference to both of them? I would appreciate any suggestions and resources from the List! Thank you so much, May Mahdi Al-Ramadan Reference: Carnie, A (2007). Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Blackwell Publishing. |
|
| LL Issue: | 21.4595 | |
| Date posted: | 16-Nov-2010 | |
|
Back |
||
|
|
||
|
Sums main page
|
||


