Arabic-L:LING:Query on Arabic yes/no questions

[Dilworth Parkinson]

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arabic-L: Wed 17 Nov 2010
Moderator: Dilworth Parkinson <dil at byu.edu>
[To post messages to the list, send them to arabic-l at byu.edu]
[To unsubscribe, send message from same address you subscribed from to
listserv at byu.edu with first line reading:
            unsubscribe arabic-l                                      ]

-------------------------Directory------------------------------------

1) Subject: Query on Arabic yes/no questions

-------------------------Messages-----------------------------------
1)
Date: 17 Nov 2010
From: reposted from LINGUIST
Subject: Query on Arabic yes/no questions

[This was posted on LINGUIST, but I thought some of you might like to answer.  Please respond directly to May, but I will also post your answers to the list if you like.--dil]

My name is May Mahdi Al-Ramadan, from Saudi Arabia. I am a lecturer 
and I am studying for a PhD in Applied Linguistics in King Saud 
University in Riyadh. 

I am working on a paper about the formation of Yes/No questions in 
Arabic. What interests me about this subject is the claim that I read in 
Carnie (2007) that complementizer particles and subject/verb inversion 
are in complementary distribution. He states that languages can either 
have this or that but not both. In Standard Arabic, a complementizer 
(Hal) is used at the beginning of yes/no questions. The verb precedes 
the subject in Standard Arabic in both sentences and questions. An 
example for this is as follows:

1) Hal  thahaba   abouka?
  C    went      father-your
  "Did your father go?" 

In Saudi Arabic, on the other hand, the complementizer is dropped. 
Subject/verb inversion is used instead. An example:

2) Obouk          raH?
  Father-your    went
  "Did your father go?"

My question is that, how is it possible to incorporate the view that 
complementizers vs. subject/verb inversion are in complementary 
distribution into the analysis of Arabic that obviously has both methods 
of forming questions? Or possibly is it more valid to assume that the 
two varieties of Arabic are distinct and no generalization can be made 
with reference to both of them?   

I would appreciate any suggestions and resources from the List!

Thank you so much,

May Mahdi Al-Ramadan

Reference:

Carnie, A (2007). Syntax: A Generative Introduction. Blackwell 
Publishing. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
End of Arabic-L: 17 Nov 2010
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/arabic-l/attachments/20101117/f8bed18b/attachment.htm>