View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Newcastle University eTheses THE STRUCTURE OF DP IN CENTRAL KURDISH Rebwar Shafie Tahir A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theoretical Linguistics School of English Literature, Language and Linguistics Newcastle University April 2018 ii Abstract This thesis investigates the syntactic structure of DP (determiner phrase) in Central Kurdish within the Minimalist Program (Chomsky 1995, and subsequent work). It explores the syntax of functional categories including inflectional elements such as Izafe, number, definite and indefinite markers. The study examines the structural relation between these functional categories and the noun, shedding new light on the syntax of DP in a language which has not so far been well investigated. Using the Minimalist derivational theory, this thesis explores the derivation of extended nominal projections in Central Kurdish. The study provides a detailed account of the Izafe construction. I argue that Izafe triggers movement of NP to a position above the modifier(s), and also marks agreement in definiteness. Two types of Izafe are recognized: AP Izafe and NP Izafe. While AP Izafe agrees in definiteness with D realized by the definite article, NP Izafe shows Case agreement with a modifying DP complement. I argue that such agreement relations are established by Chomsky’s (2000, 2001) probe/goal agreement operation, except that the agreement relations occur upwards, the probe being c-commanded by the goal (contra Chomsky 2000, 2001, but in line with Baker 2008; Wurmbrand 2012; Zeijlstra 2012). Given that Central Kurdish has two definite articles, -eke and –e, which occur on different sides of number at spell-out, I argue that there are two DP layers projected, with the functional projection of number (NumP) intermediate between them. The higher D is realized by -e and the lower D by –eke. The featural make-up of the lower D bears uniqueness and specificity (the two features subsumed under definiteness), while the higher D carries only specificity. The thesis also argues that the inflection –êk is a marker of indefiniteness realized by the higher D category, and is not merely a grammaticalized diachronic remnant of the numeral yêk ‘one’ to mark singularity, as claimed by Lyons (1999: 95). The analysis also accounts for the syntax of number morphology and quantification in Central Kurdish. As a functional category, number is argued to project NumP realized by the inflection -an. Based on the morpheme order, NumP seems to take scope over DP, a phenomenon challenging the well-established cross-linguistic generalization that D scopes over NumP (Rijkhoff 2002; Ritter 1991). Assuming that scopal relations among functional categories are structurally represented, the peculiar hierarchical relation between DP and NumP in Central Kurdish poses a problem for Baker’s (1985, 1988) Mirror Principle, as well. However, I provide evidence that the projection of number (NumP) falls under the scope of another DP projection headed by a D which is morphologically realized in some situations by the definite marker –e. iii Two types of quantifiers are distinguished: definite and indefinite. This division offers a principled account of quantifiers, providing empirical evidence that they are realized by two structurally distinct functional categories: one above and the other below the DP projection. iv Declaration No material contained in this thesis has previously been submitted for a degree at Newcastle University or any other university. Signed Rebwar Shafie Tahir Date v “We shouldn’t be looking for heroes, we should be looking for good ideas” Noam Chomsky vi Acknowledgements I am grateful to my supervisors Anders Holmberg and Maggie Tallerman for their crucial guidance and encouragement all the way through the thesis. In particular, I thank Anders Holmberg for his invaluable comments which always helped me come up with new ideas. Needless to say, without his advice and suggestions this thesis would never get to printing. I would also record my acknowledgements to the Department of Linguistics at Newcastle University for providing me with the essential training during my postgraduate studies. The inspiring syntax lectures I was given by the teaching staff helped me very much develop my interest in syntax. In this respect, my special thanks go to Anders Holmberg, Joel Wallenberg, Maggie Tallerman and Gosia Krzek. Also, I thank S J Hannahs for teaching me two modules of phonological theory and also Magdalena Sztencel who taught me a course in Semantics and Pragmatics. I am also intellectually in debt to my fellow Kurdish colleagues in the Linguistics Department of Newcastle University, including Rebeen, Twana and Zana. They were always ready to answer my questions and provide me with constructive comments. This work has also benefitted from several discussions with my Jordanian colleague Marwan Jarrah to whom I am hugely indebted for his thoughtful and precious insights throughout the thesis. Some parts of this thesis were presented at North American Conference in Iranian Linguistics (Stony Brook University/ New York), Edinburgh University Postgraduate Linguistics Conference (Edinburgh University), the Linguistics Association of Great Britain (LAGB) Conference (University of Kent/ UK) and the 40th Annual Meeting of the DGFS (Deutsche Gesellschaft Fur Sprachwissenschaft (University of Stuttgart/ Germany). The thesis greatly benefited from feedback, discussions and questions raised by the audiences. I especially wish to give my special thanks to Arsalan Kahnemuyipour, Gary Thoms, Guglielmo Cinque, Jila Ghomeshi, Liliane Haegeman, Mark Baker, Pollet Samvelian, Richard Larson, Simin Karimi, Vida Samiian and Umit Atlamaz. Also, I would like to thank The Higher Committee for Education Development in Iraq (HCED) for providing me with financial support all the way during my study. Their contribution in this regard goes far beyond this acknowledgement. Finally, my family deserve special thanks and heartiest gratitude for their constant support. I owe them a lot for always inspiring me to pursue my dreams, and for showing so much patience during my study. Without their selflessness and devotion, this journey would never be completed. To them, this thesis is heartily dedicated. vii viii Table of Contents Abstract …………………………...………………………………………………………... iii Acknowledgements ……………………………………………………………...…………. vii Table of Contents ……………………………………..……......…………………………... ix List of Abbreviations ……………………………………………..……………………….... xi Chapter 1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Outline of the thesis and research questions ................................................................ 1 1.2 Central Kurdish: a brief background............................................................................ 8 1.3 Previous research on Central Kurdish........................................................................ 10 1.4 Theoretical framework and basic assumptions .......................................................... 11 Part I. The Izafe Construction ............................................................................................. 16 Chapter 2. The Izafe Construction: Description and Overview ..................................... 17 2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 17 2.2 The distribution of Izafe............................................................................................. 18 2.3 The morphology of Izafe: a suffix or a clitic? ........................................................... 22 2.4 Constituency .............................................................................................................. 25 2.5 The functions of Izafe ................................................................................................ 28 2.6 Previous works on Izafe: a literature review .............................................................. 31 2.7 The syntax of Izafe: why does Izafe occur in CK? .................................................... 40 2.8 Concluding remarks ................................................................................................... 47 Chapter 3. The Izafe Construction: A Syntactic Analysis .............................................. 49 3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 49 3.2 The derivation of Izafe: a syntactic analysis .............................................................. 49 3.2.1 AP Izafe: a roll-up movement analysis............................................................... 51 3.2.2 NP Izafe: a non-roll-up movement analysis ....................................................... 66 3.3 Agreement within the nominal phrase ....................................................................... 74 3.3.1 Agreement of AP Izafe in DEF feature .............................................................. 75 3.3.2 Agreement between NP Izafe and DP in Case feature ....................................... 86 ix 3.4 Concluding remarks .................................................................................................. 89 Part II. Definiteness, Number