The Department of Linguistics presents a
PhD Dissertation Defense by
Hossam Eldin Ibrahim Ahmed
June 3, 2015
11:00 AM
LNCO 2945
Title: Verbal Complementizers in Arabic
Abstract:
A class of Modern Standard Arabic complementizers known as ‘ʔinna and its sisters’ demonstrate unique case
and word order restrictions. While CPs in Arabic allow both SV and VS word order and their subjects show
nominative morphology, CPs introduced by ʔinna ban a verb from directly following the
complementizer. Preverbal subjects in ʔinna clauses show accusative case marking, while postverbal subjects
show nominative morphology. Previous research accounts for case marking restrictions after ʔinna in terms of
Default Case or as an instance of Multiple Case Assignment, both problematic for Case theory as they violate
the Activation Principle, whereby each DP must be Case licensed once and only once in narrow syntax,
assuming that morphological case reflects structural Case. This dissertation accounts for word order and case
effects of ʔinna within the framework of Phase Theory and Feature Inheritance. Morphological, historical, and
usage evidence point out that ʔinna-type complementizers have verbal properties similar to illocutionary
verbs. Taking Case to be a reflection of phi features that T heads receive from higher heads (e.g.
Complementizers) via Feature Inheritance, the nominative-accusative alternation on preverbal subjects can be
attributed to the selection of C heads: phi features on null complementizers and conditionals reflect as NOM,
while phi features on verbal complementizers (ʔinna and its sisters) reflect as ACC. Nominative case on
postverbal subjects of ʔinna clauses is explained as an effect of anti-agreement at Spell-Out. Postverbal
subjects are local to the Case probe on T, belonging to the same phonological phrase, allowing for
impoverished case agreement in PF. Preverbal subjects belong to a different phonological phrase from the
Case licenser. To satisfy the Recoverability Condition, full case agreement is required between T and the
subject, resulting in accusative morphology on the subject. Finally, the requirement that ʔinna-clauses must
have an intervener between ʔinna and the verb is explained by associating the full phi features of ʔinna with
the EPP property: the requirement that the specifier positon be filled. The phi set inherited from ʔinna to T,
the EPP property is satisfied by the preverbal subject or by adverbial intervening between ʔinna and the verb.
To request an ADA accommodation, please contact: Director, Office of Equal Opportunity and Affirmative Action, 201 S.
Presidents Cr., #135, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, (801)581-8365. Reasonable notice is required.