Abstract
The correlation between Pro-drop and the nature of verbal morphology is a universal principle. This syntactic phenomenon has been parameterized on the basis of verb inflection. Rich verbal inflection has been advocated to allow pro-drop subject. On contrast, if a language structure maintains a low level of verbal morphology, pro will not be dropped. This paper comes to show that Standard Arabic (SA) is a partial pro-drop language. It has null subject even with rich verbal inflection structure. Nonetheless, the paper shows that in some forms of imperative sentence that have poor verbal inflection, but the subject is optional. On the other side, and on the basis of minimalism, pro is asserted to have features that must be checked in the course of derivation. These features are case and agreement that can be valued at Specifier-head configuration to pro. The process of checking optimally tries to draw evidence for the minimum level of morpho-syntactic features that pro in SA carries.
Highlights
The term pro-drop has been already formed by Chomsky (1981) in his masterwork of (Lectures on Government and Binding)
Being pro-drop language is a syntactic property seems compatible with economy principle of minimalism
We can claim that the absence of pronominal subject in such constructions is more economic than its presence which requires overt phonetic representation at phonetic form (PF)
Summary
The term pro-drop has been already formed by Chomsky (1981) in his masterwork of (Lectures on Government and Binding). According to Universal Grammar (UG), and in the Principles and Parameters (PP) framework, the concept of pro-drop is justified by cross-linguistic evidences. This syntactic property is based on the idea that rich verbal morphology allows subject pronoun deletion. Non-rich verb morphology is assumed to disallow this syntactic feature This phenomenon is classified as parameterized cross-languages due to structure-dependent principle. The presence of the pronominal subject in initial position will be redundant This process of subject property seems as a structural variation that allows speaker/writer to express the content with two options: null or overt subject whose meaning can be preserved. The current studies came to draw evidences that pro-drop is instead a cross-language varied
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
