Case and agreement in Sorani dialects of Sanandaj and and Bane: a minimalist approach

زبانشناسی و گویش های خراسان

Article 1, Volume 6, Issue 11, July 2015, Pages 1-28   

Document Type: علمی - پژ‍وهشی

DOI: 10.22067/lj.v6i11.37355

Authors

Ebrahim Badakhshan^{* 1}; Yadqar Karimi²; Rozita Ranjbar³

¹Allameh / Kurdistan

²Allameh Tabataba’i University

³AllamehTabataba'ee

Abstract

In the recent theory of generative grammar there are two major views on case assignment. The standard Chomskyan view stats that case is assigned by the grammatical head to the closest NP through an agreement relationship (Baker, 2010). In this approach case has a purely syntactic notion as a case assigner and is directly related to structural cases and structural relations of case receiving NPs. In the second view case assigning takes place by corpus rules in the phonological component. In this approach there is no direct relationship between case assignment and agreement, and the morphological hierarchy assigns the case for NPs. In this article based on data from Sorani Kurdish dialects of Sanandaj and Bane and comparing the similarities and differences of these two varieties of Kurdish, it is shown that different varieties of Sorani Kurdish follow different approaches in their case assigning system.

Keywords

case assignment system; structural approach; morphological approach

References

دانش‌پژوه، فاطمه (1385). ارگتیو در زبان کردی (سورانی ، کرمانجی ، هورامی). پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه پیام نور.

دبیرمقدم.محمد.(1383).زبان‌شناسی نظری(پیدایش و تکوین دستور زایشی)،تهران: انتشارات سمت.

________(1390).زبان‌شناسی نظری(پیدایش و تکوین دستور زایشی )، ویرایش دوم، چاپ پنجم.تهران: انتشارات سمت.

________ (1392). رده شناسی زبان‌های ایرانی(جلددوم).تهران،انتشارات سمت.

کریمی، یادگار. (1388). «ساخت کُنایی: منشأ و ماهیت آن»؛رساله‌ی دکتری. دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.

_______ (1392).«نظام حالت‌دهی در ترازوی رویکردهای نحوی و ساختواژی»،مجموعه مقالات دومین همایش ملی نحو و رده‌شناسی، انجمن زبان‌شناسی ایران. صفحه 155-177 .

Adger, D. (2003). Core Syntax, a minimalist Approach .Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Baker, M. (2011).On agreement and its relationship to case: Some generative ideas and results.To appear in a special issue of Lingua, edited by Luigi Rizz

Baker, M. (In progress) Case: Its Principles and Its parameters, Cambridge University Press.

Baker, M. and Vinokurova, N. (2010).Two Modalities of Case Assignment in Sakha. Natural language and linguistic Theory 28:593-64.

Baker, M. C. (2014). On dependent ergative case (in Shipibo) and its derivation by phase. Manuscript, Rutgers University; Revised version to appear in Linguistic Inquiry.

Bobaljik, J. and Wurmbrand, S. ( 2008). Case in GB/Minimalism.In Andrej Malchukov and Andrew Spencer, eds. Handbook of Case. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 44-58.

Bobaljik, J. (2008). Where's Phi? Agreement as a post-syntactic operation. In Phi Theory: Phi Features Across Interfaces and Modules, eds. David Adger, Daniel Harbour and Susanna Bejar, 295-328. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and bindingtheory. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Foris Publications.

Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: the framework. In Martin, R., Michaels, D. & Uriagereka, .Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz, Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-54). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. (2008). On phases. In Freidin, R., Otero, C. & Zubizarreta, M-L. (Eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dabir-Moghaddm, M.(2012). Linguistic Typology: An Iranian perspective, Jurnal of Universal Language, V.13, N. 31-70.

Holmberg, A. and Odden, D. (2004). Ergativity and role-marking in Hawrami. Paper presented at Syntax of the world’s languages (SWL 1), Leipzig, Germany.

Johns, A. (1992). Deriving ergativity. Linguistic Inquiry23.57–88.

Karimi, Y. (2010). Unaccusative transitives and the Person-Case Constraint effects in Kurdish. Lingua 120, 693-716.

Karimi, Y. (2013). Extending Defective Intervention Effects.The Linguistic Review 30:1, 51-75.

Karimi.Y. (2012).The evolution of ergativity in Iranian languages. Acta Linguistica Asiatica, 2:1, 23-44.

Legate, J. (2008).Morphological and abstract case. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 55-101..

Mahajan, A. (1994). The ergativity parameter: have-be alternation. In Proceedings of NELS 24, ed. Gonzàlez, M., 317–331.GLSA, University of Massachussetts, Amherst.

Marantz, A. (1984). On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Marantz, A. (1991). Case and Licensing.In G. F. Westphal, B. Ao, & H.-R. Chao (Ed.), ESCOL '91:Proceedings of the Eighth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, pp. 234-253.

Baltımore: OhioState University, University of Maryland.

Marantz, A. (2000). Case and Licensing. In Reuland, E. Arguments and Case, pp. 11-30. John benjamins, Amsterdam.

McFadden, T. (2004).The position of morphological case in the derivation.University of Pennsylvania, Ph.D. dissertation.

Radford, A. (2009). Analyzing English Sentences, a minimalist Approach.Cambridge University Press.

Woolford, E. (2006). Lexical Case, Inherent Case, and Argument Structure.Linguistic Inquiry37, 111–130.