In:Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXXI: Papers from the annual symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Norman, Oklahoma, 2017
Edited by Amel Khalfaoui and Youssef A. Haddad
[Studies in Arabic Linguistics 8] 2019
► pp. 181–204
Generic expressions in Tunisian Arabic
Beyond the definite article al-
Published online: 8 July 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/sal.8.08kha
https://doi.org/10.1075/sal.8.08kha
Abstract
Previous analyses of generic expressions in Arabic have focused on definite singular and plural DPs headed with the definite article al- (Fehri, 2004; Al-Malki et al., 2014). This study introduces an additional type of generic reference expressed with the Tunisian Arabic (TA) demonstrative hāk. Based on an analysis of naturally occurring discourse, this study shows that the felicity of this generic demonstrative is subject to a number of constraints. First, the generic demonstrative hāk always occurs with a plural count or singular non-count noun and a restrictive modifier in order to denote a familiar (i.e., in memory) kind set. Second, the evoked kind set must be a relatively subordinate and atypical (i.e., less central) kind set in accordance with Rosch (1978) and Lakoff’s (1987) principles of categorization.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Generic expressions in Arabic: An overview
- 3.Previous work on generic demonstratives
- 4.The current study: Generics expressed with the demonstrative hāk
- The demonstrative hāk: Morphosyntactic and cognitive status features
- Methodology
- General constraints
- Category variability
- Level of categorization
- Prototypicality
- 5.Conclusion
Acknowledgments Notes References
References (17)
Al-Malki, E. A., Majiid, N. A., & Omar, N. A. M. (2014). Generic reference, Arabic and Malay: A cross linguistic typology and comparison. English Language Teaching, 7(11), 15–27.
Bowdle, B. F., & Ward, G. (1995). Generic demonstratives. In J. Ahlers, L. Bilmes, J. S. Guenter, B. A. Kaiser, & J. Namkung (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 32–43). Berkeley CA.
Carston, R. (2006). Relevance theory and the saying/implicating distinction. In L. Horn, & G. Ward (Eds.), The Handbook of Pragmatics (pp. 633–656). USA/UK/Australia: Blackwell Publishing.
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics: An introduction. New Jersey/London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Fehri, A. F. (2004). Nominal classes, reference, and functional parameters, with particular reference to Arabic. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 4, 41–108.
Gundel, J. K., Zacharski, R., & Hedberg, N. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69 (2), 274–307.
Gundel, J. K., Bassene, M., Gordon, B., Humnick, L., & Khalfaoui, A. (2010). Testing predictions of the Givenness Hierarchy framework: A crosslinguistic investigation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 1770–1785.
Khalfaoui, A. (2007). A cognitive approach to analyzing demonstratives in Tunisian Arabic. In M. Mughazy (Ed.), Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics (Vol. XX, pp. 170–186). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Maclaran, R. (1980). On two asymmetrical uses of the demonstrative determiners in English. Linguistics, 18 (9–10), 803–820.
McNeil, K., & Faiza, M. (2012). Tunisian Arabic Corpus 2012. Retrieved from [URL]
OH, S.Y. (2001). A focus-based study of English demonstrative reference: with special reference to the genre of written advertisements. Journal of English Linguistics, 29 (2), 124–148.
Prince, E. F. (1992). The ZPG letter: Subjects, definiteness, and information-status. In W. C. Mann, & S. A. Thomson (Eds.), Discourse description: Diverse analyses of a fund raising text (pp. 295–325). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.