Abstract
One of the most challenging, but rather interesting, topics in the literature of Arabic phonology and morphology is the broken plurals (BP). The most widely acceptable account of Arabic BP, as far as I know, is McCarthy (1982) within the framework of Autosegmental Phonology. This paper presents and discusses the model of McCarthy (1982) and shows that it is unsatisfactory for providing a plausible account for Jordanian Arabic BP, as it suffers from a number of exceptions that McCarthy found hard to account for. The emergence of Optimality Theory (OT) in the 1990s has opened the door for further perspectives of treating different phonological problems. This paper shows that there are three major issues that constitute a challenge to McCarthy's Model of Arabic BP within the framework of Autosegmental Phonology. They include dialectal variation, the existence of more than one surface plural form for the same input, and the difference in the outputs of BP forms with the same underlying form. It also cannot account for the diverse shape of similar forms. As an alternative, this paper proposes a model within the framework of Optimality Theory that can account for and solve all the challenging problems for McCarthy’s model in a satisfactory and straightforward manner.
Highlights
Broken plurals in Arabic have been undertaken by a number of researchers
This paper presents and discusses the model of McCarthy (1982) and shows that it is unsatisfactory for providing a plausible account for Jordanian Arabic broken plurals (BP), as it suffers from a number of exceptions that McCarthy found hard to account for
This paper shows that there are three major issues that constitute a challenge to McCarthy's Model of Arabic BP within the framework of Autosegmental Phonology
Summary
Broken plurals in Arabic have been undertaken by a number of researchers. Abd-il ‘al (1977), McCarthy (1982, 2011), Hammond (1988), and McCarthy and prince (1990), are just a few examples. It is strongly believed that the above researches have failed to offer a satisfactory account of broken plurals in Arabic within the framework of traditional morphology. (Note 1) It endeavors to offer reasonable solutions to the points that McCarthy (1982) dubbed "problematic" in BP He mentioned that there are reasons in Arabic broken plural he does not understand (P.191). McCarthy's model and analysis suffer from a number of exceptions that violate his analysis One instance of such exceptions is that some nouns have more than one BP, such as /bayt/ 'house, verse', which is realized as /byūt/ 'houses' or /’abyāt/ 'lines of verse'. There is no explanation why /bayt/ has two different surface broken plurals
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have