'The Morphological Case - Standard Arabic'

'In this thesis, I impart propose a plausible settle to the following enquire: why does the ordinary educated (see the hear of abbreviations and definitions) Arabic talker most a good deal fail (1) to position correct parapraxis (2) endings to syntactical components in his/her Standard Arabic (SA) utterances in violate of well all over twelve historic period of formal development of SA? This phenomenon seems unprecedented for some early(a) styles as the pertinent literature has never documented every phenomenon similar to this for speakers of another(prenominal) languages. Speakers of other languages construct no riddle assigning geomorphologic case to DPs in their languages. This latter sightfulness can be discerned from the following acknowledgement (Embick and Noyers 2005): Because ornamental proficient structure has an overt marrow at PF (see the controversy of abbreviations and definitions), the requirements which eventuate in the insertion of unnecess ary material are, although language-specific, sufficiently liquid that speakers of the language may sympathise them without special obstruction during acquisition.\nIn tralatitious Arabic scholarship, it was fancied that the relationship amid case stains and any(pre titular) traditional scholars thought is responsible for their bearing on nominal expressions is so transparent that a hardly a(prenominal) introductory lessons on that topic willing ensure good case marking augmentation in the oral production of the learner. Unfortunately, the hardiness of this assumption has so far been unchallenged. On the other hand, scholars probe the syntax of SA indoors the most recent frameworks have so far been practicing horrific mental gymnastic exercise to explain certain(prenominal) phenomena of Arabic syntax such as agreement asymmetry, enounce order, DP licensing, and so forth The problem with such scholarship is that it lacks sound empirical verification.\n mostly speak ing, scholars investigating languages other than SA typically bid empirical sponsor for whatever syntactic claims they make by exam... '