Welsh 'syntactic mutation' and Arabic 'faulty accusative: case or configuration?

1 First European Symposium in Celtic Studies, Trier, 5-9 August 2013

Welsh syntactic mutation and Arabic faulty accusative: case or configuration?

Steve Hewitt, [email protected], UNESCO

Welsh syntactic mutation, often known as direct object mutation (DOM), after the most commonly affected element, has been the subject of considerable debate among theoretical linguists in recent decades. It is the main Celtic initial consonant mutation which appears to be controlled from a distance (most other initial consonant mutations in Celtic languages are triggered by some immediately preceding element). Analyses of Welsh syntactic mutation fall broadly into two camps: semantic (case) vs syntactic (configuration), cf. the XP trigger hypothesis (XPTH) (W sangiad interpolation) and the Distance Dependency Hypothesis (DDH). In Formal Arabic (= Classical Arabic; Modern Standard Arabic), a little-noted and ostensibly incorrect, but strongly persistent phenomenon, faulty (indefinite) accusative, instead of correct indefinite nominative, is strikingly reminiscent of Welsh syntactic mutation (all Arabic examples of faulty indefinite accusative would show syntactic mutation in Welsh) in that it appears to involve some trigger constituent intervening between the head and the dependent affected. Indeed, it may be possible to describe the grammar of accusative-marked elements in Formal Arabic in simpler configurational terms, not only for faulty indefinite accusatives, but for all accusatives, thus incorporating these erroneous, but persistent constructions fully into a more accurate grammar. Finally, evidence suggests that the two phenomena in both languages may have originally involved semantic case rather than simple syntactic configuration; but the fact that these twin explanations to a very large extent overlap may, diachronically, have promoted a case > configuration reanalysis by native speakers both in Arabic and in Welsh. In other words, both the case and the configuration approaches may be apposite, but the configurational approach is probably now more correct for Welsh than the case-marking approach. The Formal Arabic faulty accusative analogue of Welsh syntactic mutation highlights how natural such a rule may be cross-linguistically.

Abbreviations

< original source of quote apersonal verb form: tense-

marked, but not person-marked

1, 2, 3 first, second, third person A agent ACC accusative ACC! Ar. faulty accusative

(

Steve Hewitt Welsh syntactic mutation and Arabic faulty accusative: case or configuration? 2

1. STRIKING SIMILARITY BETWEEN ARABIC FAULTY ACCUSATIVE AND WELSH SYNTACTIC MUTATION

(1a) wid: an yakn lad-k hadafan Muammad asanain Haikal, Maa haikal one: that should.be.SBJM with-you.M objective.M.ACC! Al-Jazeera, 20.03.2008 one: that you should have an objective; SFA

(1b) Un: bod da chi darged ( d fy mrawd my brothers house, or proper noun Pedr > Bedr.

2. PRELIMINARIES

2.1 Person-marking:

For ease of comprehension, we usually gloss what the verb form contains in normal English: kataba [he.wrote], rather than [write.PST.3.SG]. Both Arabic and Welsh do not indicate number in verbs followed by a 3.SG/PL subject; unlike Welsh, Arabic does indicate gender; such lack of indication of number (possible in the 3rd person only) is indicated by . In such cases, we gloss kataba ar-raul/ar-ril [wroteM the-man/the-men] and katabat al-mar/an-nis [wroteF the-woman/the-women]; in Welsh, ysgrifennodd y dynion/y merched [wrote the men/the women].


2.2 Celtic impersonal/autonomous form; Arabic mahl unknown, passive: $

Both Arabic and Welsh have special impersonal/autonomous forms indicating action by some indeterminate human subject, who one cannot, or does not wish to specify. Such forms are indicated in glosses with $, indicating the backgrounding or withdrawal of the subject.

Celtic impersonal/autonomous forms: indeterminate human agent active / passive (see Hewitt 2002)

Breton appears always to have been of the indeterminate human agent active (IHAA) type, whereas Welsh appears to have shifted from the IHAA type towards a more genuine passive (PASS) type (accepts agentives by X), and Irish appears to have gone in the opposite direction, from the PASS type towards the IHAA type:

Type\Period Old Modern

IHAA Br, W Ir, Br

PASS Ir W

The Welsh -ir, -id, -wyd; Breton -er, -ffer, -ed, -ffed, -jed, -jod/-at; Irish -tar, -adh, -ta, -fa etc. impersonal/autonomous forms refer implicitly to some indeterminate human agent for whom there is no pronoun.

(3) gwelir t is.seen$ house a house is seen

The Arabic mahl unknown, passive vowelling patterns (perfective/past u (u) i; imperfective/present-future u (a) a) are exponents of a valency-reducing process: passive with transitives (all persons possible); indeterminate human agentive with intransitives.

Hewitt 2002:15-16, exx. 35-38: Thus, [the Celtic impersonal/autonomous forms] cannot perform the twin functions (either indeterminate subject or passive subject) of the majhl unknown, passive vowelling (36) in Arabic:

(4) qatala (a) killedM S.M (some masculine entity killed) S.M killed (b) he.killed.3.SG.M he killed

(5) qutila (a) was.killed$.M S.M (some masculine entity was killed) S.M was killed (b) he.was.killed$.3.SG.M he was killed (c) was.killed$.M it was killed, there was killing, people were killed

(6) qatal they.killed.3.M.PL they killed

(7) qutil they.were.killed.$.3.M.PL they were killed


2.3 Unaccusative

Alexiadou et al. 2004:Introduction pp.1-13: intransitive verbs divided into unergatives with an underlying VP-external subject NP [VP V], and unaccusatives with an underlying VP-internal subject NP [VPV NP]; subjects of unergative verbs have subject-like qualities; subjects of unaccusative verbs have object-like qualities.

Diagnostic Type of intransitive Unergative Unaccusative

Auxiliary selection (where split) jai march / je suis all HAVE BE

Impersonal passives (German, Dutch) es wird getanzt / *es wird gegangen

Subject-NP-modifying past participle: *the worked student / the departed boy

Presentative construction: *there telephoned four new students / there arrived four new students

Ne-cliticization (Italian) * ne teleferanno molti / ne arriveranno molti studenti

Alexiadou et al. 2004:12-13:

a. Generally unergative predicates: i. Predicates describing willed or volitional acts, e.g. work, play, speak, talk, smile, grimace, wink, walk, box,

knock, bank, laugh, dance; manner-of-speaking verts, e.g. whisper, shout, bellow; predicates describing sounds made by animals e.g. bark, quack, roar.

ii. Certain involuntary bodily processes e.g. cough, sneeze, burp, sleep. b. Generally unaccusative predicates: i. Predicates expressed by adjectives in English; predicates describing size, shapes, weights, colours, smells.

ii. Predicates whose initial nuclear term is semantically a patient, for example, burn, fall, drop, sink, float, tremble, shake, melt, freeze, evaporate, solidify, crystallize, dim, redden, darken.

iii. Predicates of existing or happening, such as exist, happen, occur, take place. iv. Involuntary emission of stimuli, for example shine, glow, clink, pop, smell, sting. v. Aspectual predicates: begin, start, stop, cease.

Unclear what tests could be used for Arabic or Welsh (cf. Tallerman 2001): no BE/HAVE auxiliary split; past/passive participle Arabic , but not fully productive for Welsh. Presentatives not distinctive in VSO languages. No ne-cliticization. No clear split with impersonal passives.

2.4 Arabic diglossia

Diglossia: Ferguson 1959a; original Arabic koin not identical with Classical Arabic: 14 non-classical features shared by all modern dialects, Ferguson 1959b.

Formal Arabic (FA): fu al-lu al-fu the most elegant, refined language (Qurnic Arabic, Classical Arabic, Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), Spoken Formal Arabic (SFA). Written and formal oral production; no ones native language, but some regular users acquire near-native competence (most Western Arabists deny this). No one dialect closer to Formal Arabic than another. Differences (cf. Altoma 1969, Brustad 2000) concern lexicon, syntax, morphology (FA irb lit. Arabization: terminal mood variations in verbs; terminal case and definiteness variations in nominals), phonology (some consonants have varying reflexes in different dialects; most Arabs well aware, through television, of these equivalences; see Annex 1). Fu likely to have developed from a pre-Qurnic poetic koin never actually spoken spontaneously (al-muallaqt the hung ones: the very best pre-Islamic poems hung up for public inspection in Mecca). SFA often shorn of final irb, except when apparent in script, bringing it close to ESA.

Colloquial dialects al-lu al-mmy the common language, al-lu ad-drij the ordinary language, lahj dialect, local form. mother tongue of all Arabs: capital of each country,


sometimes other distinct prestigious varities, e.g.: Aleppo, Mosul, Fs, Benghazi, etc. All spontaneous oral communication except in the most formal situations. Rarely written, except for dialect poetry, some plays, cartoon captions; not felt to be a suitable medium for normal written communication. Most Arabs believe that modern dialects are corruptions of Classical Arabic (cf. above, Ferguson 1959b); often describe dialects to non-Arabs as slang no grammar; loath to teach Colloquial Arabic to non-Arabs. Slightly different status of Egyptian (Cairo) Colloquial: extremely well-defined and stable; understood throughout the Arab world thanks to Egyptian soap operas and films; often acceptable in formal situations where other Arabs would use SFA (also true to a lesser extent of Lebanese Colloquial).

Intermediate forms: Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA): dialect-based morphology (e.g. no -n, -n, no feminine human plurals, no duals in verbs; no case or indefinite markers in nominals, esp. absence of accusative indefinite -an, mainly Egyptian or Levantine (Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian) and to a lesser extent Iraqi dialect base. Many MSA lexical items (usually no equivalents in spoken dialects).

Medieval Muslim Middle Arabic (MMA), Christian Middle Arabic (CMA), Jewish Middle Arabic (JMA, written in Hebrew letters, but reproducing Arabic orthographic conventions: alef used to represent all of , and final -an/- (indefinite accusative), as with final Arabic alif U? . Impression given by such texts is of a living, spontaneous language very close to the borderline area between modern ESA and SFA.

3. WELSH

3.1 Welsh soft mutation (lenition L)

Orthography

p t c m b d g ll rh b d g f dd - l r

IPA

p t k m b d r b d v -(


3.2 Welsh syntactic mutation

(11) Tentative rule for syntactic mutation: V.T [XP]T LNP

(12) Mae torth oL Lfara ar y bwrdd is loaf of bread on the table There is a loaf of bread on the table.

(13) Mae [na]T Ldorth oL Lfara ar y bwrdd is there loaf of bread on the table There is a loaf of bread on the table. Adv

(14) Mae [ar y bwrdd]T Ldorth oL Lfara. is on the table loaf of bread There is a loaf of bread on the table. PrP

(15) Gwelodd [Sin]T y t Saw Sin the house

(16) Gwelodd [Sin]T Ld Saw Sin house (t) Sin saw a house. S

(17) Gwelodd [ef]T Ld Saw he house (t) He saw a house. s

(18) Gwelodd [ef]T Ld (ef = pro) Saw.3.SG [he] house (t) He/she saw a house. pro

(19) Gwelwyd t Saw.$ house A house was seen.

(20) Gwelwyd [ar y bryn]T Ld mawr Was.seen.$ on the hill house big On the hill was to be seen a big house. PrP

(21) chonaic [m]T [anuraidh]T [iN NnGaillimhe]T Lth Irish saw.PRT I last.year in Galway you.ACC I saw you last year in Galway

Only t you.SG, s he, s she, siad they > th you.SG, him, her, iad them affected lexical?

(22) maS ollL Sflijadur (


(24) Gwnaeth [y dyn]T [Lwerthu beic.] AuxVSO (!) Did the man sell.INF bike The man sold a bike S

(25) Dechreuodd [Huw]T [Lolchi r llestri.] embedded VO clause Began Huw wash.INF the dishes Huw began to wash the dishes. S

(26) Dymunodd [Aled]T [i Mair]T [Lfynd adref.] embedded infinitival i-clause [i S]T [LV] wished Aled to Mair go.INF home Aled wanted Mair to go home S/PrP/both?

(27) Mae [yn yr ardd]T Lgi extrapolated existential (subject!) is in the garden dog There is a dog in the garden. PrP

(28) Roedd [yna]T Lgath yn y gegin existential (subject!) Was there cat in the kitchen There was a cat in the kitchen Adv

3.3 Case-based approaches to Welsh syntactic mutation

Welsh assign accusative case to objects; ACC > Linitial consonant of noun phrase (not preceded by y, r [definite article]). Lieber 1983; Zwicky 1984; Roberts 1997, 2005.

Problems:

(29) T mawr welodd e (fronting: no mutation) house big saw he He saw a big house.

(30) Roedd Sin yn gweld t (object of verbal noun/infinitive: no mutation) was Sin PROG see.INF house Sin could see a house.

(31) vdet ptcu (object of infinitive: case-marking) Russian see.INF bird.F.ACC to see a bird

(32) Yr oedd Prs yn rhagweld [PP yn 1721] dranc yr iaith Gymraeg AFF was Prs PROG foresee.INF in 1721 demise the language.F Welsh Prs foresaw in 1721 the death of the Welsh language Tallerman 2006 < Thorne 1993:52

(33) Fe welodd e d, gardd a bachgen. (only leftmost object lenited) AFF saw he house, garden and boy He saw a house, a garden and a boy.

(34) Ja vu ptcu, dvuku i mlika. (all objects accusative-marked) Russian I I.see bird.ACC.F.SG girl.ACC.F.SG and boy.ACC.HUM(=GEN).M.SG I can see a bird, a girl and a boy

Tallermann 2006, summarizing Roberts 2005 case-based account of Welsh direct object mutation:

Direct object mutation (DOM) applies exactly where the finite main verb moves to the pre-subject position in a transitive clause (i.e. to [the functional head] PERS ...). On the other hand, where an auxiliary appears initially and the transitive main verb is realised in a non-finite form ... occupying a position in between the subject and the object, there is no DOM.


3.4 Configurational approaches to Welsh syntactic mutation

XP Trigger Hypothesis (XPTH): [XP]L > Linitial consonant of noun phrase (not preceded by definite article y, r) Rhys Jones 1977 (NP without article mutates following subject pronoun/NP/proper name); Harlow 1989; King 1993, 1995, 1996, 2003; Borsley 1997, 1999; Borsley & Tallerman 1996; Tallerman 1987, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2006, 2009.

Tallerman 2009:171: The principal idea in this literature is that initial consonants undergo SM when immediately preceded by a phrase, XP

Tallermann 2009:172: A complement bears S[oft] M[utation] if it is immediately preceded by a c-commanding phrase.

No reference to head/verb. Original suggestion by Rhys Jones: subject [of verb] indirect reference, but informal characterization taken literally by XPTH supporters.

Phonological Phrase Formation (PPF) () (Hannahs 1996):

(Hannahs 1996:52) Phonological Utterance (PU) > Intonational Phrase (I) > Phonological Phrase () > Clitic Group (C) > Phonological Word (PW) > Foot () > Syllable ().

(Hannahs 1996:54) [T]he mutated word is the leftmost element of a (phonological phrase) and is preceded immediately by another

[ ... ] [ _ ... ]

Dependency Distance Hypothesis (DDH) (Hudson 2009):

Tallerman 2009:176: X bears soft mutation if: (a) X is a VALENT of a preceding overt head H, and (b) X is SEPARATED from H.

Hudson 2009:

Valent: subject or complement

SSM applies to any valent D2 which is:

after the head word H

and separated by another dependent of H, D1

(so dependency distance of D2 > 0).

Case approach: Does not readily explain why no soft mutation on: (a) fronted objects; (b) non-leftmost objects; (c) objects following infinitives (verbal nouns).

Configuration approach:

XPTH: No reference to head (verb); SM caused solely by immediately preceding XP (in same clause).

DDH: Reference to three terms: head (verb), intervening element (trigger), mutated noun (target).

4. ARABIC

4.1 Formal and Colloquial Arabic verb systems

See Annex 6 note written forms (in yellow) which would not also reflect the spoken form; most of the time, the written form may be interpreted (read out) either as Formal Arabic or as Educated Spoken Arabic.


4.2 Formal Arabic case system nouns, adjectives, participles (no case system in Colloquial Arabic)

Most common type (for all other declension types, see Annex 5 note written forms (in yellow) which would not also reflect the spoken form; most of the time, the written form may be interpreted either as Formal Arabic or as Educated Spoken Arabic:

Arabic name of case English French definite indefinite

raf being high, above (amma ? u) nominative cas sujet -u -un

(xaf being low, below (kasra ? i) arr pulling genitive cas indirect -i -in

nab raising, putting up (alif tanwn ?) accusative cas direct -a -an

Pierre Larcher (Aix-en-Provence, p.c.): it is thought that the Arabic terms raf, xaf, nab are scripto-pictorial, and refer to the placement of the nominative vowel amma ? u above (raf) the final consonant, the genitive vowel kasra ? i below (xaf) the final consonant, and writing an alif upwards (nab) after the final consonant for the nunated accusative indefinite ? an. (The more usual term today for the genitive, jarr pulling seems to be syntactic, referring to genitive constructs NP+NP or Prep+NP). The only case ending of this, by far the most frequent declension, which is apparent in unvocalized script is the accusative indefinite ? an.

Arabic script (unvocalized) Transcription (raised letters full, formal) construct definite indefinite indefinite definite construct

XO XO XO N bait

un al-baitu baitu

G baitin al-baiti baiti

UO UO A baitan -# (-#) al-baita baita

house house

Only Formal Arabic (Qurnic, Classical, Modern Standard Arabic (MSA)) has irb (case and mood terminal variations, see Annexes 5 and 6); no living Arabic dialects do. Bedouin -in, -n (popularly thought to prove that Bedouins have retained case-marking) is an invariable highlighting marker, not true case.

Proper irb is de rigueur in all non-dialectal writing (dialectal writing uncommon; however, new ESA styles arising with email and texting).

Most irb endings (except indefinite accusative) not apparent in unvocalized writing (writing usually not vocalized, except in Qurn and pedagogical materials, or to disambiguate; partial vocalization sometimes in classical poetry).

Dialect-based Educated Spoken Arabic (ESA) does not normally use case endings at all, except for the very productive adverbial an (< accusative indefinite) e.g. tmtkyan automatically.

Spoken Formal Arabic (SFA) may range from full production of all case and mood endings (few competent to do so spontaneously without slip-ups mainly newsreaders, literary academics, religious leaders) to observance of correct endings only where apparent in the script (much more frequent solution), with speakers constantly moving up and down the formality continuum.

Pausal forms: even in the most formal Arabic, a sentence-final short vowel -a, -i, -u or nunated vowel -in, -un is always elided; many speakers simply extend this principle to more and more words sentence-internally, and even to all words, so as not to have to worry about getting it right.

Problem with indefinite accusative: correct pausal form - felt to be affected, precious (reminiscent of Qurnic recitation, classical poetry); solution: either elide -an entirely (informal) or retain an in all positions, even finally (formal).


H r land; ar- [land-my] my land; nfal ar- [he.fell ground-dir] he fell to the ground Ar. waqaa ar-an (pausal form: ar-) [he.fell earth-acc] he fell to the ground. Hebrew directional one of the few traces of the Proto-Semitic case system in Biblical/Classical Hebrew.

Present/future 3.M.PL and 2.F.SG endings: distinction between na, -na (indicative) vs -, - (subjunctive, jussive) observed in writing and in SFA, but not in ESA a given dialect will have one or the other, but not both with a distinction between them.

Dual and feminine human plural endings in verbs restricted to FA, and very formal SFA; some bedouin-type dialects still have feminine plural verb forms, but these would not be used in ESA.

Common solution for SFA: reproduce full irb only where actually apparent in Arabic script. Only someone speaking at least this formally may be used to test for faulty accusative.

In written texts, only indefinites of the first and third declension classes may be used to test for faulty accusative because only they are unambiguously indicated in the script and are not shared with some other case (nominative or genitive, such as the masculine and feminine participial forms and the dual forms, last classes); in the latter case the accusative/genitive usually coincides with the general spoken form,; so such a form could thus be the result of levelling influence from Colloquial Arabic, ESA.

Common saying among Arabs about speaking fu (Formal Arabic):

(35) izim, taslam cut.short.IPR.2.SG.M you.will.be.safe.JUSS.2.SG.M Cut short [elide case and mood vowellings], youll be safe.

4.3 Functions of the Formal Arabic cases

The nominative case (raf, marf) (unmarked, default form) is used for:

subject of a verb.

subject and predicate of a nominal (verbless) sentence.

citation form of nominals (nouns/adjectives)

The genitive case (arr, marr [xaf, maxf]) is used solely for genitive constructs:

all except first term of a genitive construct NP+NP(+NP(+NP, etc.)); (first term is nominative, genitive, accusative, according to syntactic context).

object of a preposition PrP (all prepositions take the genitive).

complement of ayy any.

complement of an elative: akbaru baitin [big.ELAT.NOM house.GEN] the biggest house.

The accusative case (nab, manb) is used for a much wider range of functions:

direct/indirect object of a verb.

subject X (= NP) of clauses beginning with the pseudo-verb inna NP introductory, highlighting particle ( Heb. hinn lo, verily) and its sisters (all subordinating: lakinna but X; anna that X; lianna because X; kaanna as if X; laalla perhaps X, in the hope/fear that X); also laita in the hope that X (X in each case complement of a pseudo-verb).

predicate (in Arabic direct object) of kna/yaknu be and its sisters (laisa not be; m zla not continue, remain = still be; ra reach > become; abaa reach morning > become; a reach forenoon > become; ams reach evening > become; alla remain, continue; bta spend the night, become). Hence, al-baitu kabrun the houseNOM.DEF is bigNOM.IDF, but al-baitu kna kabran


[the houseNOM.DEF it.was.3.SG.M big.ACC.IDF] the house was big (all complements of BE and other predicative verbs)

both objects of anna think, consider X as Y and its sisters (asiba reckon, consider; itabara consider; aala make X Y, etc.) (verb X = Y) (all complements of verbs of considering X as Y), and a give Y X (also a give X to Y)

internal/cognate object: ma mashyan saran [walked.PRT.3.SG.M walk.ACC quick.ACC] he walked a quick walk > ma saran [walked.PRT.3.SG.M quick.ACC] he walked quickly (all cognitive [(same-root) objects of verbs)

adverbs: saran fast, rapidly (same as above, with elision of cognate object).

objects of specification (tamyz), purpose, circumstance (l): itaala muhandisan [worked.3.SG.M engineer.ACC] he worked as an engineer (complement of verb function, purpose).

nouns after numerals 11-99 (unit+ten+NP (cf. German) distance government over (multiple of) ten; even plain multiples of ten: 20 =? zero+20, or by assimilation to unit+ten+NP?). 1: SG; 2: DU; 3-10 + PL.GEN; 11-99 + SG.ACC; hundreds, thousands, millions, etc. + SG.GEN;

4.4 Example of scripted oral Formal Arabic and spontaneous Spoken Formal Arabic

(a) Arabic script; (b) what Arab eyes see; (c) FA fullirb; (d) SFA partial irb; (e) ESA no irb;

(a) WO WOU) uHuWOKzUF U s be uKD

(b) mwfw wzr -lxry -ltrky ylbwn mzyd mn -l-z -lyly

(c) muwaaf wizrti l-xriyti t-turkyti employees.M.PL.CS ministry.F.GEN.(CS) the-external.F.GEN the-Turkish.F.GEN

yalubna mazdan mina l-izti lilyti they.demand.M.PL more.ACC.IDF of the-leave.F the-family.ADJ.F

(d) muwaaf wizrt al-xriy at-turky yalubn mazdan min al-iz al-ily

(e) muwaafn wizrit al-xriy at-turky (b)yulub mazd_ min al-iz al-ly

Employees of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs demand more family leave.

http://www.aljazeera.net/portal

lack of corpus material for Spoken Formal Arabic and for unedited Formal Arabic; difficult to assess the prevalence of faulty accusative only concrete examples of faulty accusative are significant; absence may always be attributed to observance of the canonical grammar.

Arabic faulty accusatives noted in Spoken Formal Arabic and in poorly edited or unedited texts (Emad Mohamed, Egyptian linguist, Indiana University, p.c., notes that written faulty accusatives are particularly common in letters to the editor and in film subtitles, both produced hastily, and without proper editing; reveal more about users real grammatical instincts).

4.5 Formal Arabic equivalents of Welsh examples in 3.1

(36) Tentative rule for faulty accusative: V [XP]T ANP

(37) ra ysufu l-baita sawM Yusuf.NOM the-house.ACC.DEF Yusuf saw the house.


(38) ra [ysufu]T Abaitan sawM Yusuf.NOM house.ACC.IDF Yusuf saw a house. S

(39) ruiya l-baitu was.seen$.M the-house.M.NOM.DEF The house was seen.

(40) ruiya baitun was.seen$.M house.M.NOM.IDF A house was seen.

(41) ruiya [al t-tall] baitun kabrun was.seen$.M on the-hill house.M.NOM.IDF big.M.NOM.IDF On the hill was to be seen a big house. Correct

(42) ruiya [al t-tall]T Abaitan Akabran was.seen$.M on the-hill house.M.ACC!IDF big.M.ACC!IDF On the hill was to be seen a big house. Faulty accusative, PrP

4.6 Definite object marker (DFO) in Hebrew, Persian and Turkish

Important for detecting unaccusative in Biblical Hebrew.

(43) r ysef bayi (Classical) Hebrew sawM Joseph house Joseph saw a house.

(44) r [ysef]T A-ha-bayi (Classical) Hebrew sawM Joseph DFO-the-house Joseph saw the house. (configurational analysis possible, but more likely DFO case-marking)

(45) ysuf manzil dd Persian Yusuf house he/she.saw Yusuf saw a house / some houses.

(46) ysuf manzil-r dd Persian Yusuf house-DFO he/she.saw Yusuf saw the house

(47) yusuf ev grd Turkish Yusuf house he/she.saw Yusuf saw a house / some houses

(48) yusuf evi grd Turkish Yusuf house.DFO he/she.saw Yusuf saw the house.

4.7 Examples of Arabic faulty accusative: V.T [XP]T ANP

Faulty accusative in Arabic noticed by Blau (various), Schen 1973, Mahmoud 1991, Abdul Raof 1998, Peled 2004, and myself (without at first being aware of these authors). No trace in standard grammars (ostensibly incorrect).

(49) wid: an yakn [lad-k]T Ahadafan Muammad asanain Haikal, Maa haikal one: that should.be.SBJM with-you.M objective.M.ACC! Al-Jazeera, 20.03.2008 One: that you should have an objective; SFA, PrP


(50) yabd anna-hu sa-yakn [hunk]T Aallan siysyan BBC Arabic.com seems that-it FUT-will.beM there solution.M.ACC! political.M.ACC! 04.05.2004 yattasim bi-l-fau li-l-au f l-irq it.will.be.characterized.M by-the-anarchy to-the-conditions in the-Iraq MSA, Adv It seems that there will be a fairly anarchical political solution to the situation in Iraq

(51) wa-l akk f anna rmsfld BBC Arabic.com 07.05.2004 and-no doubt about that Rumsfeld MSA, o-NP l yazu-[hu]T Aayyan min htain a-ifatain NEG lack-him any.ACC! of these.two.DU.F the-two.qualities.DU.F and there is no doubt that Rumsfeld does not lack either of these qualities

[determination and firmness]

(52) wa-naqari an yudra [f l-waq 33 mm/5]T Egyptian reply to consultation and-we.suggest that be.included.$.M in the-document 33 C/5 on UNESCO Programme Anuhjan ify mutarak bain al-qit amilt:... and Budget for approaches.F.ACC! additional.F joint.F between the.sectors likes.CS: 2006-2007 We suggest that additional intersectoral approaches be included in document 33 C/5, such as:... MSA, PrP

(53) wa-sa-yuqad [yauma adin]T Aitiman xar Iat a-arq and-FUT-will.be.held.$.M day.ACC.CS tomorrow.GEN meeting.M.ACC! other.M 19.07.2005 and another meeting will be held tomorrow SFA, Adv

(54) lia anna-hu warada [bi-hi]T (adwal al-aml) Egyptian reply to consultation was.noticed.$.M that-it.M arrived in-it.M [agenda] on UNESCO 33 C/Resolution 92 Auran wfiy explanations.F.ACC! extensive.F MSA, PrP It was noted that it [the agenda] contained extensive explanations

(55) wa-kna [la-h]T (muallaft Ibn Rushd) Ms asan, Pres. UNESCO Gen. Conf., and-wasM to-them.F.SG [works Ibn Rushd] World Philosophy Day 15.11.2006, Ataran kabran al l-fikr al-mas wa-l-falsaf Rabat, Morocco influence.ACC! great.ACC! on the-thought the-Christian and-the-philosophical f l-ur al-wus MSA, PrP in the-ages the-middle.F And they [the works of Ibn Rushd (Averros)] had a great impact on Christian and philosophical

thought in the Middle Ages.

(56) abaa [hunk]T Aburdan bain amrk wa-marInterviewer M war al-xabar has.becomeM there coolness.ACC between America and-Egypt Al-Jazeera, There is now a coolness between America and Egypt SFA, Adv 1950 GMT 02.04.2008

(57) hal yabq [f l-ahn]T Aaaran al maql MSA, PrP INT remainM in the-minds trace.ACC! on dictum.F yuraddidu-h ba al-mustariqn al-udud wa-l-mutaaibn1 repeatM-it.F some the-orientalists.M.PL the-new.M.PL and-the-fanatical.M.PL Is there any trace left in [peoples] minds of a dictum often repeated by some latter-day, fanatical

orientalists

(58) inna-n f mir [ladai-n]T Amnan rsixan bi-anna Egypt, UNESCO Executive HLP-we in Egypt with-us faith.ACC! firm.ACC! in-that Board, 182 EX/SR.3 para. 7.4 We in Egypt have a firm belief that MSA, PrP 12.09.2009

1 The influence of the Arab heritage on the West in the field of medicine and pharmacology, paper presented at the International Encounters on the Shores of the Mediterranean: The Alchemy of an Uninterrupted Dialogue, UNESCO, Paris, 4-6 December 2008.


(59) laisa [la-h]T (al-arakt al-muri) Adauran fil al-Ittijh al-mukis is.notM to-them.F.SG (the-movements the-opposing) role.ACC! active. 21.09.2010, 1940 GMT They [the opposition movements] have no active role SFA, PrP

(60) wa-nataalla il an Egypt, 186th UNESCO Executive Board and-we.look.forward.1.PL to that 186 EX/SR.2 para. 2.6, 09.05.2011 yakn [li-l-ynesk]T Adauran f MSA, PrP beSBJ.M to-the-UNESCO role.ACC! in And we look forward to UNESCO having a role in .

4.8 Examples of Arabic faulty accusative analysed by Peled (2004) as unaccusative, but for which a configurational approach also works

Peled 2004 remarkable article explains faulty accusative effects in Arabic (and Hebrew) as the result of unaccusativity. Peled almost certainly unaware of the configurational XPTH approach for Welsh. For non-contemporary examples, Peled rightly gives only non-vocalized original Arabic or Hebrew script; my proposed transcriptions, to make the examples accessible to non-Semiticists; assumption that final Ar. U? or H is -an rather than strict pausal form -; of little moment for the argument.

(61) fa-lam yabq [la-hu]T Aaaran > < d t UI rK PELED 2004:122 so-NEG.PRF remainM to-it.M trace.ACC!


(68) malik(un?) wulida [la-hu]T > < UM t s t b pK PELED 2004:125 king.NOM? was.born.$.M to-him


(80) im A-kl d ha-yam > < - PELED 2004:126 or DFO-all fish.PL.CS the-sea -oh blocking lenition?), irrespective of whether NP is subject or object (difficult to ascertain conclusively; absence of written lenition does not prove absence in spoken language) (also increasing frequency of post-verbal subject pronouns, all ending in vowels).

With introduction of T-2 constraint, O (P) and S.UA (P) likely to be more frequent following V than S.UE (A) (general tendency for NPs with object properties to come later than those with subject properties).

Post finite-verb lenition shifts from phonetic to semantic: first NP with object properties: O (P) or S.UA (P). Accusative case realized by lenition on first object-like bare NP (no definite article).

Shift from semantic (case)-based rule (above) to simpler configuration mechanism, as in Arabic: V.T [XP]T LNP (XP may be S, s, pro, PrP, Adv, etc.) with no reference to semantic function; neatly accounts for sangiad lenition of non-objects.

Need to screen Middle Welsh texts (by 50-year periods with following types) for lenition of post-verbal NPs and for relative prevalence of types: (V = verb; A = agent (transitive subject; intransitive unergative subject); P = patient (transitive object; intransitive unaccusative subject;

Verb-initial: V A P; V A; V P

X-initial: X V A P; X V A; X V P

Argument-initial: A V P; A V; P V; (P V A?)


6. A (VERY!) TENTATIVE CONCLUSION

Arabic evolution: case (unclear when lost in living dialects) > unaccusative effects give faulty accusative NOM ACC > configuration: V.T [XP]T ANP, XPTH or DDH? Possible overlapping of unaccusative and configuration, with growing dominance of configuration; unlikely that faulty accusatives which can only be explained by unaccusative effects are frequent today; distance dependency, yes frequent (near-native-speaker reanalysis of canonical fu rules governing indefinite accusative marking). Could also cover all other normal functions of accusative

Welsh evolution: phonetic (sandhi) after tensed verb endings: lenition on first post-verbal NP following vowels and sonorants > (in connection with emergence of Middle Welsh T.2) post-verbal intransitive subject increasingly likely to be unaccusative > lenition of post-verbal NPs thus increasingly associated with object features > VSO with systematic lenition of Case effects unsurprising; XPTH overlaps with probably dominant today, and appears to explain all instances of syntactic mutation (DOM, sangiad, etc.)

7. ENVOI

reliability of data in generative work on exotic languages

usefulness of typology with smaller numbers of languages of which linguist has practical mastery

possibility of rules from different components overlapping, applying simultaneously (e.g. both case or unaccusative and XPTH)

Hewitt 2001:156 Lun des dbats rcurrents en linguistique moderne concerne le nombre et lorganisation des composants de la grammaire phonologie, morphologie, lexique, syntaxe, smantique, pragmatique, structure de linformation, etc., et lon recherche un modle maximalement efficace et conomique, avec des frontires prcises et tanches entre ces composants. Cependant, lon sait quen phontique acoustique le signal sonore contient une redondance optimale de lordre de 50 % avec moins de redondance, le risque de perdre le signal est trop grand ; avec plus de redondance, le systme devient excessivement lourd. Ce principe de redondance optimale pourrait bien stendre lensemble des sous-systmes linguistiques, et notamment aux rapports entre eux ; ainsi il ny aurait plus de frontires nettes (mais curieusement insaisissables) entre les diffrentes parties de la grammaire, dont le chevauchement servirait renforcer la fiabilit du systme. Mme lopposition entre la rptition mcanique de phrases toutes faites et lanalyse grammaticale sophistique pourrait sestomper dans ce schma, les deux principes sappliquant simultanment. Lanalyse grammaticale est naturellement ncessaire pour pouvoir produire et dcoder des phrases totalement nouvelles : la phrase jai vu un crocodile en coiffe danser la gavotte avec Alexis Gourvennec na gure t produite auparavant, mais elle est parfaitement comprhensible pour tout locuteur du franais. En revanche, lon peut se demander si tout le dispositif grammatical est rellement mis en marche chaque fois quon dit ou entend jen sais rien , phrase qui a d tre prononce littralement des milliards de fois. Finalement, lide de la redondance optimale et du renforcement mutuel des diffrents composants de la grammaire pourrait galement expliquer comment les gens qui parlent des variantes sensiblement diffrentes dune langue arrivent communiquer.

rK e izim, taslam!

Cwtogwch, byddwch yn saff!

Cut short, youll be safe!


Annex 1: Arabic consonants dialect variation

= pharyngealization (tafxm) emphatic consonants: a dull, hollow, dark sound, mainly perceptible to non-Arabs in the lower, backed timbre of the adjacent vowels) [sounds used in elevated lexical items]

Letter

Name

Standard transcription

Classical Arabic

Bedouin dialects

Urban dialects

l d

, th, t , dh, d

,

(orig. ?)

t [s] d [z] [] []

qf q () q [q] [q]

m , j, dj Lower Egypt, North Yemen Levant, Maghreb Upper Egypt, Sudan

One of the epithets of the Arabic language is lut a-d the language of the [letter] d, so unique that sound was deemed to be; it is paradoxical that is today a sound which many Arabs have trouble pronouncing correctly; in spoken dialects it falls everywhere together with //: Bedouin-type dialects //; urban-type dialects (ordinary words) // (but often not pharyngalized: /d/), (elevated words) //. There is evidence that the original sound also involved a lateral, i.e. something like , cf. Arabic al-q the judge, cf. Spanish alcalde mayor.

Annex 2: Arabic dialect map

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Arabic_Dialects.svg


Annex 3: Arabic script positional forms, transcription variants and IPA values

name of letter alone end middle front transcription IPA hamz R? Q? T? R? Q? ?? alif U? < a/i/u- -- - () a () alif mamdd P? < + b V? ?? ? b b t X? ?? ? t t Y? ?? ? th t (t s) m Z? ?? ? j dj ( ) `? ?? ? H 7 x a? ?? ? x kh k 5 x dl b? < d d l c? < dh d (d z) r d? < r r zy e? < z z sn f? ?? ? s s n g? ?A? ? sh d h? ?B? ? S 9 s d i? ?C? ?{ D 9 d (+ z) j? ?D? ? T 6 t k? ?E? ? Z 6 (z) ain l? ?F? ? c 9 3 ain m? ?G? ? gh g 3 f n? ?H? ? f f qf o? ?I? ? q 2 8 q ( ) kf p? ?J? ? k k (/_i/e_) lam q? ?K? ? l l lam-alif ? < l / l-a/i/u- (l+, l+a- i- u-) mm r? ?L? ? m m nn s? ?M? ? n n h t? ?N? ? h h t marb W? - -a -ah -t -at (CS)

- - -a - - (+h) - - -a - - +t (CS)

ww u? < u? w (- in verbs) au aw

w u: : au ou (o)

y w? ?O? ? y ai ay

j i ai ei (e)

alif maqr v? - - (-) - -a - (-) fat ? (U? W? U?) a (-an) a (-an, -n) kasr ? (?) i (-in) i e () (-n) amm ? (?) u (-un) u o () (-n) sukn ? (no vowel) add ? CC (dbl. cons.) C

< Older traditional order (subparagraphs (a), (b), (c), etc.) Mnemonic: abad hawwaz u kaliman safa quriat axi ai


Annex 4: Hebrew script transcription variants and IPA values (Classical and Israeli Hebrew)

Alphabet Classical Hebrew Israeli Hebrew

name letter (5 have end forms) transcription IPA transcription IPA

lf (-) (-) > - b b v b bh b v b v b v gml g gh g g dl d d dh d d d he h h h h ww w w v v zayin z z z z x kh ch > x t t t t y y j y j kaf - k x k kh ch k x k x kh ch k x lm l l l l mem - m m m m nn - n n n n smx s s s s ayin c > > - pe - p f p ph p f p f - s t ? c ts tz qf q q q k ? q k k r r r ? r n sh sh n s ? s s tw t t th t t t paa a a a a sl e sl-y/ml e r e e e r-y/ml e e rq i i i i rq-y i i i qma gl : a a qma f o o lm o o o lm-ww/ml o o qibbu u u u u rq u u u w e e aef-paa a a aef-sl e e aef-qma o o

Bakfa letters: with de (point inside), stops: b d g p t k; without de, fricatives: v f x (Israeli Hebrew only for v, f, x)

Gr diacritic for non-Hebrew sounds: j/ x (not ) ' x / .

Classical Hebrew consonants: , b~v, d~, g~, h, w, z, , , y, k~x, l, m, n, s, , p~f, ,.q, r, , , t~; long vowels: , , , , ; short vowels: a, , e, i, , o, u; furtive vowels: , a, ,

Classical > Israeli Hebrew: >d, >g, >t, w>v, > c[], >s, (>x, >>-), double consonants > simple; no long or furtive vowels: all vowels short: , > a; , , , > e []; > i; , , , > o []; > u


Annex 5: Terminal variations in Formal Arabic nominals (nouns and adjectives irb lit. Arabization) FA markers

Arabic script (unvocalized) Transcription (raised letters full, formal) construct definite indefinite indefinite definite construct

XO XO XO N bait

un al-baitu baitu

G baitin al-baiti baiti

UO UO A baitan -# (-#) al-baita baita

house house

Wb Wb* Wb N madrastun, -h# al-madrasatu, -h# madrastu

G madrastin, -h# al-madrasti, -h# madrasti

A madrastan, -h# al-madrasta, -h# madrasta

school F.SG school F.SG

w{U w{UI U N qn (al-)q G UO{U A qyan -iy#) (al-)qya

judge judge

vMF vMF* vMF N

mann (al-)man G A

meaning meaning

u ub u N

daw (ad-)daw G A

call, invitation call, invitation

_ N akbaru (al-)akbaru

G akbara (al-)akbari

A (al-)akbara

biggest, most great biggest, most great

wUF wUF* UF N

mann (al-)man G wUF A manya (al-)manya

meanings F.SG meanings F.SG

uLK uLK* uLK N (al-)muslimna muslim wLK 5LK* 5LK G (al-)muslimna muslim A

Muslims M.PL Muslims M.PL

d N rilni ar-rilni ril wK 5Kd 5K G rilaini ar-rilaini rilai A

two feet DU two feet DU

ULK ULK* ULK N muslimtun

G muslimtin A

Muslims F.PL Muslims F.PL


Annex 6: Formal Arabic verbs and typical ESA verb morphology (FA modal variations irb lit. Arabization) FA markers in script ESA markers

Arabic script MSA transcription typical ESA

kataba, yaktubu write; (ariba, yarabu drink)

Preterite (perfective) f m m f m f

3SG X V kataba katabat katab katabit 2SG X X katabta katabti katabt katabti 1SG X katabtu katabt

3PL 6 u katab katabna katabu 2PL 7 r katabtum katabtunna katabtu 1PL UM katabn katabna

3DU U U katab katabat (irib, irbit, irbu) 2DU UL katabtum

Present/Future Indicative (imperfective) 3SG VJ VJ yaktubu taktubu (b)yiktib (b)tiktib 2SG 5J VJ taktubu taktubna (b)tiktib (b)tiktibi 1SG V aktubu (b)aktib

3PL 6J uJ yaktubna yaktubna (b)yiktibu 2PL 6J uJ taktubna taktubna (b)tiktibu 1PL VJ naktubu (b)niktib

3DU UJ UJ yaktubni taktubni ((b)yirab, (b)yirabu) 2DU UJ taktubni

Imperative 2SG V uktub uktub iktib iktibi 2PL 6 u uktub uktubna iktibu 2DU U uktub (irab, irabi, irabu)

Subjunctive (FA) 3SG VJ VJ yaktuba taktuba yiktib tiktib 2SG J VJ taktuba taktub tiktib tiktibi 1SG V aktuba aktib

3PL 6J uJ yaktub yaktubna yiktibu 2PL 6J uJ taktub taktubna tiktibu 1PL VJ naktuba niktib

3DU UJ UJ yaktub taktub (yirab, yirabu) 2DU UJ taktub

Jussive (FA) 3SG VJ VJ yaktub taktub yiktib tiktib 2SG J VJ taktub taktub tiktib tiktibi 1SG V aktib

3PL 6J uJ yaktub yaktubna yiktibu 2PL 6J uJ taktub taktubna tiktibu 1PL VJ naktub niktib

3DU UJ UJ yaktub taktub (yirab, yirabu) 2DU UJ taktub


References and bibliography

Arabic

ABDUL-RAOF Hussein. 1998. Theme and Agent in Modern Standard Arabic. Curzon, Richmond, UK. al-Ittijh al-mukis [The Opposite Direction]: Al-Jazeera debating programme pitting two guests against each other. Al-Jazeera: international Arabic satellite channel. ALTOMA Salih J. 1969. The Problems of Diglossia in Arabic: A comparative study of Classical and Iraqi Arabic.

Harvard Center for Middle Eastern Studies, Cambridge, Mass. BBC Arabic: international radio station and website. BLAU Joshua. 1946. Alif ha-akusativus le-tsiyyun ha-nose ve-ha-nasu be-tekstim araviyyim-yehudiyyim

[Accusative alif indicating subject and object in Jewish Arabic texts], Tarbiz 25:27-35. BLAU Joshua. 1965. The Emergence and Linguistic Background of Judaeo-Arabic: A study of the origins of Middle

Arabic. Oxford University Press. Reprinted by Ben-Zvi Institute, Jerusalem, 1981. BLAU Joshua. 1966-7. A Grammar of Christian Arabic, Based mainly on South-Palestinian texts from the first

millennium. Peeters, Louvain. BLAU Joshua. 1970. On Pseudo-Corrections in some Semitic Languages. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities,

Jerusalem. BLAU Joshua. 1973. Remarks on some syntactic trends in Modern Standard Arabic. Israel Oriental Studies 3:172-231. BLAU Joshua. 1976. Some additional observations on syntactic trends in Modern Standard Arabic. Israel Oriental

Studies 6:158-190. BLAU Joshua. 1988. Studies in Middle Arabic and its Judaeo-Arabic Variety. Magnes Press, Hebrew University of

Jerusalem. BLAU Joshua. 2002. A Handbook of Early Middle Arabic. Hebrew University of Jerusalem. BRUSTAD Kristen. 2000. The Syntax of Spoken Arabic: A comparative study of Moroccan, Egyptian, Syrian, and

Kuwaiti dialects. Georgetown University Press, Washington D.C. FERGUSON Charles A. 1959a. Diglossia. Word 15: 325-40. FERGUSON Charles A. 1959b. The Arabic koine. Language 35/4: 616-30. GOLDZIHER Ignaz. 1994 [1878]. On the History of Grammar among the Arabs. John Benjamins,

Amsterdam/Philadelphia. al-awdi [Events]: Arabic weekly, Beirut. al-ayt [Life]: Arabic daily, London. HAIKAL Muammad asanain. 1978. ad al-mubdara [Talking of the initiative (Sadats peace initiative with

Israel)]. Mabaat Bairt, Beirut. HASSELBACH Rebecca. 2013. Case in Semitic: Roles, relations, and reconstruction. Oxford University Press, 2013. HEWITT Steve. 2006. Arabic: verb-subject-object or verb-given-new? Paper presented at the Conference on

Communication and Information Structure in Spoken Arabic, University of Maryland, 16-18 June 2006. HOLES Clive. 2004 [1995]. Modern Arabic: Structures, functions and varieties. Revised and updated edition,

Georgetown University Press, Washington D.C. 1st edition, Longman, London 1995. HOPKINS S. 1984. Studies in the Grammar of Early Arabic: Based on papyri datable to before AH 300 / AD 912.

Oxford University Press. Iat a-arq [Radio Orient]: French-Lebanese international radio station. KINBERG Leah & Kees VERSTEEGH. 2001. Studies in the Linguistic Structure of Classical Arabic. Brill, Leiden. al-Muawwar [Illustrated]: weekly, Cairo. LENTIN Jrme & Jacques GRANDHENRY. 2008. Moyen arabe et varits mixtes de larabe travers lhistoire:

Actes du Premier Colloque International (Louvain-la-Neuve, 10-14 mai 2004). Peeters, Louvain. Maa haikal [With Haikal]: Weekly hour-long reminiscences on Al-Jazeera by Muammad asanain Haikal, editor-

in-chief of al-Ahrm, Egyptian government newspaper, in the days of Nasser; Nassers closest confidant. MAHMOUD Abdelgawad T. 1991. A constrastive study of middle and unaccusative constructions in Arabic and

English, pp.119-36 in Bernard COMRIE & Mushira EID (eds), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics III: Papers from the Third Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

M war al-xabar [Behind the News]: News background programme on Al-Jazeera satellite television. OWENS Jonathan. 1988a. Case and proto-Arabic. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, Part I:

61/1:51-73; Part I: 61/2:215-27.


OWENS Jonathan. 1988b. The Foundations of Grammar: An introduction to medieval Arabic grammatical theory. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

OWENS Jonathan. 1990. Early Arabic Grammatical Theory: Heterogeneity and standardization. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.

PARKINSON Dilworth B. 1994. Speaking Fu in Cairo: The role of the ending vowels, pp.179-211 in Yasser SULEIMAN (ed.), Arabic Sociolinguistics: Issues and perspectives, Curzon, Richmond, Surrey, UK.

PELED Yishai. 1999. Aspects of the use of grammatical terminology in medieval Arabic grammatical tradition, pp.50-85 in Yasir SULEIMAN (ed.), Arabic Grammar and Linguistics, Routledge Curzon, London & New York.

PELED Yishai. 2004. Accusatival subjects in Arabic non-transitive constructions and the unaccusative hypothesis, A. LEVIN, S. HOPKINS, J. BLAU, et al (eds) Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 29:111-35: Studies in honour of Moshe Piamenta. Institute of Asian and African Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

PELED Yishai. 2009. Sentence Types and Word-Order Patterns in Written Arabic. Brill, Leiden. SCHEN I. 1973. Usama Ibn Munqidhs memoirs: Some further light on Muslim Middle Arabic (Part II), Journal of

Semitic Studies 18:64-97 VERSTEEGH Cornelis H.M. (Kees). 1993. Arabic Grammar and Qurnic Exegesis in Early Islam. Brill, Leiden, New

York, Cologne. VERSTEEGH Cornelis H.M. (Kees). 1995. The Explanation of Linguistic Causes: Al-Zas theory of grammar

introduction, translation, commentary. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia. (see Ch XVI The theory about the lexical meaning of the nominative, accusative and genitive

VERSTEEGH Cornelis H.M. (Kees). 1997. Landmarks in Linguistic Thought III: The Arabic Linguistic Tradition. Routledge, New York/London.

VERSTEEGH Cornelis H.M. (Kees). 2001. The Arabic Language. Edinburgh University Press. VERSTEEGH Cornelis H.M. (Kees), Konrad KOERNER, Hans-J. NIEDEREHE (eds). 1982. The History of Linguistics in

the Near East. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. al-Waan al-arab [the Arab Homeland]: weekly, Paris. WRIGHT William. 1859-1862. A Grammar of the Arabic Language. 2 vols. Simon Wallenberg, London. Numerous

editions and reprints. Zack Liesbeth & Arie Schippers. 2012. Middle Arabic and Mixed Arabic: Diachrony and synchrony. Brill, Leiden.

Unaccusativity; grammatical/thematic roles/relations; split auxiliary systems

ALEXIADOU Artemis, Elena ANAGNOSTOPOULOU, Marin EVERAERT (eds). 2004. The Unaccusativity Puzzle: Explorations of the syntax-lexicon interface. Oxford University Press.

ARANOVICH Ral (ed.). 2007. Split Auxiliary Systems: A cross-linguistic perspective. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia.

DONOHUE Mark & Sren WICHMANN (eds). 2008. The Typology of Semantic Alignment, Oxford University Press. DOWTY David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection, Language 67/3:647-619. BURZIO L. 1986. Italian Syntax: A Government and Binding approach. Reidel, Dordrecht. LEVIN Beth. & Malka RAPPAPORT-HOVAV. 1995. Unaccusativity at the Syntax-Lexical Semantics Interface.

Cambridge, Massachusetts. LEVIN Beth. & Malka RAPPAPORT-HOVAV. 2005. Argument Realization. Cambridge University Press. PALMER Frank R. 1994. Grammatical Roles and Relations. Cambridge University Press. PERLEMUTTER David M. 1978. Impersonal passives and the unaccusative hypothesis, pp. 157-90 in Proceedings of

the 4th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. RAPPAPORT-HOVAV Malka, Edit DORON, Ivy SICHEL (eds). 2010. Syntax, Lexical Semantics, and Event Structure.

Oxford University Press. SORACE Antonella. 2000. Gradients in auxiliary selection with intransitive verbs, Language 76/4:859-90.

Welsh, Celtic

BALL Martin & Nicole MLLER. 1992. Mutation in Welsh. Routledge, London. [esp. 3.3 Direct Object Mutation (and others) revisited, pp.136-161]

BORSLEY Robert D. 1986. Prepositional complementizers in Welsh, Journal of Linguistics 20:277-302. BORSLEY Robert D. 1989. An HPSG approach to Welsh, Journal of Linguistics 25:333-54. BORSLEY Robert D. 1995. On some similarities and differences between Welsh and Syrian Arabic. Linguistics 33:99-

122.


BORSLEY Robert D. 1997. Mutation and case in Welsh, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 42/1-2:31-56 (special issue, E. GUILFOYLE (ed.) Topics in Celtic Syntax).

BORSLEY Robert D. 1999. Mutation and constituent structure in Welsh, Lingua 109:267-300. BORSLEY Robert D. & Ian ROBERTS. 1992. The Syntax of the Celtic Languages: A comparative perspective.

Cambridge University Press. BORSLEY Robert D. & Maggie TALLERMAN. 1996. Phrases and soft mutation in Welsh, Journal of Celtic Linguistics

5:1-33. BORSLEY Robert D., Maggie TALLERMAN, David WILLIS. 2007. The Syntax of Welsh, Cambridge University Press. COMRIE Bernard. 1977. In defence of spontaneous demotion: The impersonal passive. pp.25-55 in Peter COLE &

Jerry SADOCK (eds), Syntax and Semantics, vol. 8, Grammatical Relations. Academic Press, New York. EVANS D. Simon. 1964. A Grammar of Middle Welsh. Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. HAMP Erich. 1951. Morphophonemes of the Keltic mutations, Language 27:230-47. HANNAHS S.J. 1996. Phonological structure and soft mutation in Welsh. pp.46-69 in U. KLEINHENZ (ed.), Interfaces

in Phonology. Akademie Verlag, Berlin. HANNAHS S.J. 2011. Celtic mutations, pp.2807-30 in Marc VAN OOSTENDORP, Colin EWEN, Beth HUME, Keren RICE

(eds), Blackwell Companion to Phonology, vol. V. Wiley-Blackwell, Boston. HANNAHS S.J. forthcoming. Celtic initial mutation: Pattern extraction and subcategorisation. Word Structure 5/2: HARLOW Stephen J. 1981. Government and relativization in Celtic, pp.213-54 in Frank HENRY (ed.), Binding and

Filtering. Croom Helm, London. HARLOW Stephen J. 1989. The syntax of Welsh soft mutation, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 7:289-316. HARLOW Stephen J. 2009. Syntactic soft mutation in Welsh: A constraint-based alternative to the XP Trigger

Hypothesis. Handout of talk given on 26 May 2009 at the Department of Linguistics and Modern Languages, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

HEWITT Steve. 2001. Quest-ce quune langue ? pp. 155-7 in Parlons du breton ! Petra nevez gar brezhoneg ? [Whats new with Breton?] Exhibition catalogue, Association Buhez / Ouest France, Rennes.

HEWITT Steve. 2002. The impersonal in Breton, Journal of Celtic Linguistics 7:1-39. HUDSON Dick. 2009. Welsh soft mutation and Word Grammar. Presentation to the annual meeting of the Linguistics

Association of Great Britain, 6-9 September 2009. IOSAD Pavel. 2006. Some observations on the grammaticalization of ICM [initial consonant mutation] in Welsh.

Moscow Student Conference in Linguistics, 14 April 2006. IOSAD Pavel. 2007a. AllWordsLeft: The development of Welsh mutation. Presentation at the Fifth Celtic Linguistics

Conference, 7-9 September 2007, Plas Gregynog, Wales. IOSAD Pavel. 2007b. Grammatikalizovannyje eredovanija naalnyx soglasnyx: Tipologija, teorija, diaxronija

[Grammaticalized alternations of initial consonants: Typology, theory, diachrony]. MA thesis, Moscow State University.

IOSAD Pavel. 2007c. Phonological processes as lexical insertion: More evidence from Welsh and elsewhere. Old World Conference in Phonology 4, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece, 19-21 January 2007.

IOSAD Pavel. 2010. Right at the left edge: Initial consonant mutations in the languages of the world. pp.105-38 in Michael CYSOUW & Jan WOHLGEMUTH (eds), Rethinking Universals: How rarities affict linguistic theory, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.

JONES Bob Morris. 2010. Tense and Aspect in Informal Welsh. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York. KIBRE Nicholas J. 1997. A Model of Mutation in Welsh. Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington. KING Gareth. 1993. Modern Welsh: A comprehensive grammar. Routledge, London. 2nd edition 2002. KING Gareth. 1995. Basic Welsh: A grammar and workbook. Routledge, London. KING Gareth. 1996. Intermediate Welsh: A grammar and workbook. Routledge, London. KING Gareth. 2003. Colloquial Welsh. Routledge, London. 2nd edition 2008. LIEBER Rochele. 1983. New developments in autosegmental phonology: consonant mutations, pp.165-75 in Michael

Barlow, Charles A. Ferguson, Daniel Flickinger, M. Westcoat (eds), Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

LONGOBARDI Giuseppe & Ian ROBERTS. Forthcoming. The parametric comparison method and the Celto-Semitic puzzle.

MANNING H. Paul. 1995. Fluid intransitivity in Middle Welsh: Gradience, typology and unaccusativity, Lingua 74:171-94.


MORGAN T.J. 1952. Y Treigladau au Cystrawen [Mutations and their Construction]. Gwasg Prifysgol Cymru [University of Wales Press], Caerdydd [Cardiff]; syntactic mutation: esp. pp. 182-233.

MORRIS-JONES John. 1913. A Welsh Grammar, Oxford University Press. MORRIS-JONES John. 1931. Welsh Syntax: An unfinished draft. University of Wales Press, Cardiff. RHYS JONES T.J. 1977. Teach Yourself Living Welsh. Hodder and Stoughton, London. ROBERTS IAN. 2004. Parametric comparison: Welsh, Semitic and the Anti-Babelic principle. Handout, University of

Cambridge. ROBERTS Ian. 2005. Principles and Parameters in a VSO Language: A case study in Welsh, Oxford University Press. ROBERTS Ian. 1997. The syntax of direct object mutation in Welsh, Canadian Journal of Linguistics 42/1-2:141-68

(special issue, E. GUILFOYLE (ed.) Topics in Celtic Syntax). ROUVERET Alain. 1994. Syntaxe du gallois: Principes gnraux et typologie. CNRS ditions, Paris. SADLER Louise. 1988. Welsh Syntax: A government-binding approach. Croom Helm, London. SCHRIJVER Peter. 2010. Free lenition in Middle Welsh: Problems of function and origin, handout for history of

Welsh lectures, Cambridge University, 19-20 March 2010; http://igitur-archive.library.uu.nl/let/2011-0304-200624/Cambridge%20MWFreelenition%20_2_.pdf

STRACHAN John. 1909. An Introduction to Early Welsh. Manchester University Press. STUMP Gregory. 1995. Nonlocal spirantization in Breton. Journal of Linguistics 24:457-81. TALLERMAN Maggie. 1987. Mutation and the syntactic structure of modern colloquial Welsh. PhD dissertation,

University of Hull. TALLERMAN Maggie. 1990. VSO word order and consonantal mutation in Welsh, Linguistics 28:389-416. TALLERMAN Maggie. 1998. The uniform case-licensing of subjects in Welsh. The Linguistic Review 15:69-133. TALLERMAN Maggie. 1999. Welsh soft mutation and marked word order, pp.277-94 in Michael DARNELL, Edith

MORAVCSIK, Frederick NEWMEYER, Michael NOONAN, Kathleen WHEATLEY (eds), Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics, vol.2, Case Studies, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.

TALLERMAN Maggie. 2001. A (very!) preliminary look at unaccusativity in Welsh. Talk given at the Eighth Welsh Syntax Seminar, 4-5 July 2001, Plas Gregynog, Wales.

TALLERMAN Maggie. 2006. The syntax of Welsh direct object mutation revisited, pp.1750-76 in Robert D. BORSLEY, Ian G. ROBERTS, Louisa SADLER, David WILLIS (eds), Celtic Linguistics, special issue of Lingua 116.

TALLERMAN Maggie. 2009. Phrase structure vs. dependency: The analysis of Welsh syntactic soft mutation, Journal of Linguistics 45:176-201.

THOMAS Peter Wyn. 1996. Gramadeg y Gymraeg [Grammar of Welsh]. Gwasg Prifysgol Cymru, Caerdydd [University of Wales Press, Cardiff].

THORNE David. 1993. A Comprehensive Welsh Grammar/Gramadeg Cymraeg Cynhwysfawr. Gwasg Prifysgol Cymru, Caerdydd [University of Wales Press, Cardiff].

WILLIAMS Stephen J. 1980. A Welsh Grammar. University of Wales Press, Cardiff. WILLIS David. 1998. Syntactic Change in Welsh: A study of the loss of verb-second. Oxford University Press. WILLIS David. 2007. Historical syntax. Chap. 9, pp.286-337, in BORSLEY, TALLERMAN, WILLIS, The Syntax of Welsh. ZWICKY Arnold. 1984. Welsh soft mutation and the case of object NPs, pp.387-402 in J. DROGO, V. MISHRA,

D. TESTEN (eds), Proceedings of the Twentieth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.

Documents

Welsh 'syntactic mutation' and Arabic 'faulty accusative: case or configuration?