Ahmad Radi Alshammari
Department of English, College of Arts, University of Ha’il, Ha’il 55476, Saudi Arabia
Natural language marks causation by variable means which fall into three categories: (i) periphrastic, (ii) lexical, and (iii) morphological. In this study, the researcher utilizes Minimalist Program (MP) to analyze causative construction in Hail Arabic (HA), a spoken dialect in Saudi Arabia. According to our findings, HA exhibits the three types of causation: morphological, lexical, and periphrastic. I propose that causative constructions project a CAUSE head below the tense node (T), which gives rise to a causative meaning. Also, I assume that the CAUSE head is not always overtly realized in HA due to the various strategies for forming causative. In lexical causative, for instance, I assume that there is a null causative feature on the CAUSE, the head of the Cause Phrase (CauseP), which provides the sentence with a causative interpretation. On the other hand, in periphrastic and morphological causatives, I show that the CAUSE head is filled with the causative particle xalla ‘made’ or with a causal affix. I demonstrate that the three types of causation require an additional argument (i.e., a causer) in addition to an internal argument (a causee). I claim that there is a Voice Phrase (VoiceP) beneath the CauseP that is responsible for introducing the internal argument (the causee). Additionally, I assume that the external argument (i.e., the causer) is base generated in the specifier (Spec) position of the Cause Phrase (Spec, CauseP) before it raises to Spec, TP to satisfy the Extended Projection Principle (EPP) feature.
[1] Comrie, B., 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA. pp. 1–252.
[2] Pylkkänen, L., 2002. Introducing arguments [Ph.D. Thesis]. Cambridge, MA, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. pp. 1–128.
[3] Pylkkänen, L., 2008. Introducing arguments (Vol. 49). MIT Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–156.
[4] Golfam, A., Dehghan, M., 2012. On type: The so-called causativization in Persian. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 2(7), 1536–1543. DOI: https://doi:10.4304/tpls.2.7.1536-1543
[5] Dixon, R.M.W., 2000. A typology of causatives: Form, syntax and meaning. In: Dixon, R.M.W. (ed.). Changing Valency: Case Studies in Transitivity. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 30–83.
[6] Song, J.J., 1996. Causatives and causation: A universal-typological perspective. Longman: London, UK; New York, NY, USA. pp. 1–295.
[7] Comrie, B., 1981. Aspect and voice: Some reflections on perfect and passive. In: Philip, J., Zaenen, A. (eds.). Tense and Aspect. Brill: Leiden, Netherlands. pp. 65–78.
[8] Abbott, M., 1991. Macushi. Handbook of Amazonian Languages. 3, 23–160.
[9] Mahootian, S., 2002. Persian. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 1–404.
[10] Hoffman, C., 1991. The syntax of argument-structure-changing morphology [Ph.D. Thesis]. Cambridge, MA, USA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. pp. 1–234.
[11] Payne, T., 1997. Describing morphosyntax: A guide for field linguists. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. UK. pp. 1–413.
[12] Kroeger, P., 2004. Analyzing syntax. A lexical-functional approach. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–324.
[13] Tallerman, M., 2014. Understanding syntax. Routledge: London, UK. pp. 1–320.
[14] Benmamoun, E., 1991. Causatives in Moroccan Arabic. In: Comrie, B., Eid, M. (eds.). Perspectives in Arabic linguistics iii. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Philadelphia, PA, USA. pp. 173–195.
[15] Holes, C., 1990. Gulf Arabic. London: Routledge: London, UK. pp. 1–296.
[16] Hallman, P., 2006. Causativity and transitivity in Arabic. Available from: http://www.peterhallman.com/Causativity.pdf (cited 6 May 2008).
[17] Fassi Fehri, A., 1993. Issues in the structure of Arabic clauses and words. Kluwer: Dordrecht, the Netherlands. pp. 1–330.
[18] Taha, M., Sultan, F.M., Yasin, S.M., 2017. The morphosyntax of causative construction in Sudanese Arabic. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities. 25(2), 921–930.
[19] Manfredi, S., Sara, P., 2013. Juba Arabic. In: Michaelis, S.M., Maurer, P., Huber, M., et al. (eds.). The survey of pidgin and creole languages volume III. Contact languages based on languages from Africa, Australia, and the Americas, Oxford University Press: Oxford, MI, USA. pp. 54–65.
[20] Alotaibi, Y., 2022. Causative constructions in modern standard Arabic. International Journal of English Linguistics. 12(3), 46–57. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v12n3p46.
[21] Chomsky, N., 1995. The minimalist program. MIT Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–426.
[22]
[23] Chomsky, N., 1993. Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures (No. 9). Walter de Gruyter: Berlin, Germany. pp. 1–359.
[24] Chomsky, N., 2000. New horizons in the study of language and mind. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–214.
[25] Chomsky, N., 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken hale: A life in language. MIT Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–52.
[26] Thráinsson, H., 2007. The Syntax of Icelandic. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp.1–564.
[27] Aoun, J.E., Benmamoun, E., Choueiri, L., 2010. The syntax of Arabic. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. pp. 1–237. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511691775
[28] Benmamoun, E., 2000. The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford University Press: Oxford, MI, USA. pp. 1–167.
[29] Chomsky, N., 1981. Knowledge of language: Its elements and origins. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. B, Biological Sciences. 295(1077), 223–234.
Copyright © 2024 Ahmad Radi Alshammari
This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
