Description
A question that has driven much of the current research in formal syntax is whether it is the lexicon or the syntax that determines the argument structure of a verb. This dissertation attempts to answer this question with a focus

A question that has driven much of the current research in formal syntax is whether it is the lexicon or the syntax that determines the argument structure of a verb. This dissertation attempts to answer this question with a focus on Arabic, a language that has received little attention in the literature of argument structure. In this dissertation, argument structure realization is examined in relation to three different components, namely the root, the CV-skeleton and the structure around the verb. I argue that argument structure is not determined on a root level in Arabic. I also show that only few CV-skeletons (verb patterns) are associated with certain argument structures. Instead, the burden of determining argument structure lies on elements around the structure of VP. The determinants of inner aspect in Arabic and the relation between eventuality types and argument structure are also examined. A cartographic model is provided to show how elements around the VP play a role in determining the inner aspect. This model also represents a relationship between argument structure and eventuality types. The question of what determines argument structure is further addressed through the investigation of the causative/inchoative alternation in Arabic in light of recent semantic and syntactic accounts. I argue that most Arabic verbs that undergo the alternation are non-agentive change-of-state verbs. Although certain lexical characteristics may account for which verbs alternate and which do not, exceptions within a language and/or across languages do exist. I point to a range of phenomena that can be only explained from syntactic points of view.
Reuse Permissions
  • Downloads
    PDF (916.1 KB)
    Download count: 14

    Details

    Title
    • Argument structure in Arabic: lexicon or syntax?
    Contributors
    Date Created
    2012
    Resource Type
  • Text
  • Collections this item is in
    Note
    • thesis
      Partial requirement for: Ph.D., Arizona State University, 2012
    • bibliography
      Includes bibliographical references (p. 226-236)
    • Field of study: English

    Citation and reuse

    Statement of Responsibility

    by Mohammed AlRashed

    Machine-readable links