Derivation and Interpretation of Expressiveness Devices in North Hail Arabic: Minimalist Account

This paper investigates the interpretive properties of what are termed expressiveness devices, characterised as clitic, pronoun and demonstrative. In what seems to be cases of multiple expression of a single argument, the proposed investigation involves generative syntactic analyses to the interaction of a set of expressiveness devices with an associate DP, accounting for their interpretation at both LF and PF interfaces (Chomsky, 1995 et seq). Exploration of a set of North Hail Arabic (henceforth, NHA) data containing expressiveness devices, all of which agree in φ-features with the associate DP, it is shown that the expressiveness devices maintain rigid order in the left periphery of the clause, each generated for certain discourse-interpretive property expressing a distinct value of information structure, through establishing an Agree relation (Chomsky, 2001) with the associate DP. Amongst the insights the analyses show is that NHA allows for multiple probes agreeing with a single goal. In this way, a probing head probes through another c-commanded probing head, in which case the goal is visible to the upper probing head. Movement is therefore shown to be triggered in case where goal’s visibility, related to feature valuation, is not available, hence, movement presupposes agreement.


Introduction
Pronominals, dubbed in this research 'expressiveness devices', characterised as clitic, pronoun and demonstrative, have been widely investigated in the generative literature (Shlonsky, 2000;Ouhalla, 1994Ouhalla, , 1997Ouhalla, , 2005 due to their impact on the interpretation of the associate DP. In generative practice to grammar, expressiveness devices are widely taken as morphosyntactic output produced in the computational system of language that is sent over to the interface system for discourse-interpretive properties (Alshamari, 2017;Ouhalla, 1994Ouhalla, , 1997. In a broader sense, clitic, for instance, is massively attested in most Romantic and Semitic languages, dialectal Arabic in this paper, and has been characterized a syntactic category that contributes to the interpretation of the 'functional or discoursal' host it is associated to or the argument 'DP' it doubles (Belletti, 1999;Uriagereka, 1995;Shlonsky, 2000;Ouhalla, 1994Ouhalla, , 1997Harizanov, 2014;Kramer, 2014;Shlonsky, 2000;Alshamari, 2017). In Arabic literature, the longstanding view on the interpretive properties of clitic concludes that it functions as an anchoring device in syntax linking a semantic entity expressed by a constituent (Ayoub, 1981;Bakir, 1980;Shlonsky, 2000;Aoun et al., 2010). For instance, Aoun et al. (2010) argue that clitic spelled out on a lexical verb, for instance, is an indication of movement of the DP to the left periphery, which is not in par with interface-motivated requirements as to how a clitic functions at the LF-interface system, which is not always plausible (Note 1). A plausible view in this respect is Ouhalla (1997), claiming that a clitic expresses old information, as in the Moroccan Arabic example (1) below from (Aoun et al., 2010, p. 48) (Note 2).
(1) t-təffaħa ʕomar kla-ha how to legitimise it in an interface-oriented manner in a way that accounts for its co-occurrence with full pronouns (Alshamari, 2017).
Under this view, extending the topics typology advanced by (Frascarelli & Hinterhölzl, 2007;Alshamari, 2017) provides empirical and conceptual evidence that a clitic is a product of the valuation of an occurrence of a set of unvalued φ-features, resulting in interpreting these φ-features at PF, spelling them out only when the DP has an instance of [Top] of some sort. Put differently, Alshamari (2017) shows that a clitic doubles DP while the DP is in situ, which could be taken as a PF-component that feeds into LF-interface that the doubled DP expresses Topic of some sort, building on Ouhalla (1994Ouhalla ( , 1997 proposal. A typical example of clitic in North Hail Arabic dialect is given below from Alshamari (2017, p. 93).
(2) ʔal-laʕib lmisa-ah ʔal-ku:rah The player, the ball, he touched it.' Alshamari (2017, p. 102) characterises the operation of spelling out the clitic ah on the lexical verb as an output of an Agree relation held between the lexical verb and the object DP, what he formalises 'topical clitic generalisation'. Contra the received view proposed in the literature (cf., Shlonsky, 1997), Alshamari (2017) argues that spelling out clitic ah on the verb, in Arabic in general terms, is due to the fact that the object DP has a feature [TOP] and that this feature is overtly spelled as a clitic, after an Agree relation has been held between v and the DP object in which the latter values the unvalued φ-features of the former. On the other hand, a pronoun, normally doubles a DP and is normally referential, as we will see. Amongst the properties a pronoun feature is related to information structure. That is, a pronoun characterises a topic or focus of the sentence (Jelinek, 2002). Against this background, the research will be an attempt to investigate data as the NHA example in (3) below, which raises, on conceptual grounds, inquiry as to what legitimises that amount of referentiality the pronominals carry at the LF-interface system (I forntbold expressiveness devices and other items like particles throughout the paper): (3) ʔinn-ah Manal hi xatˤ-at ʔal-fustan bi-l-sˤalah Roughly translated: 'That she, Manal, she sewed the dress in the lounge.' The clause in (3) contains two instances of expressiveness devices, both of which agree in φ-features with the subject DP Manal, which they mark or double, using Uriagereka's (1995) terminology: the clitic ah spelled out on the complementizer ʔinn and the pronominal hi. This being raised, the rest of the paper will be dedicated to propose a plausible generative, minimalist, interface analysis to the syntax and morphosyntax of the expressiveness devices therein, accounting for their merge and legitimacy at the interface system with respect to their syntactic positions in the clause.
The paper is structured as follows. Section two touches on the descriptive nature of the data to be explored, highlighting certain phenomena where expressiveness devices' effects can be noticed. This also incorporates, where relevant, some hypotheses and generalisations proposed in the related literature. Section three is dedicated to a generative, minimalist analysis of the phenomenon, including the implementation of the generative model of Chomsky's theory of agreement and the related assumptions. This will deal with the motivation of movement when it occurs, attributing it to feature valuation and visibility to a valuator up in the structure. In addition, this section involves principles, conditions and constrains relevant to the practice of the Agree and movement mechanisms with respect to the phase theory (Chomsky, 2001) and the cartographic approach (Rizzi, 1997(Rizzi, , 2004. Section four highlights some generalisations raised by the outcomes of the research and provides suggestions further proposals and line of research. Section Five concludes the research.

Data and the Syntactic Phenomenon
One of the issues widely investigated is the motivation of spelling expressiveness devices in syntax, especially where they co-occur with and double DPs (Uriagereka, 1995). In this case, clitic, for instance, as one of the intensively investigated form of expressiveness devices, has been characterized in one of two ways. Clitic is an item that incorporates onto a head or an agreement that spells out agreement features of the doubled DP on an expressiveness device, lexical, functional or discoursal head (cf., Ouhalla, 1994Ouhalla, , 1997Ouhalla & Shlonsky, 2002;Aoun et al., 2010). This linguistic process is analysed by means of movement of the clitic from within a DP, following Uriagereka (1995) and Bakir (1980). Current development in generative practice to grammar has abstracted away from incorporation approach and reconsidered clitic as a linguistic category featuring its own syntactic and discourse properties, having interface motivations (Holmberg & Hróarsdóttir, 2003;Alshamari 2017). On theoretical and practical grounds, clitic is a syntactic object that spells out the φ-features of a DP during the course of the derivation of a sentence because the topicalised DP carries discourse information. In this way, a clitic is in par with economy considerations and interface requirements (Chomsky, 2001) in that it occurs only when the sentence is discourse-linked.
Consider the NHA example in (3) above, repeated below as (4): Roughly translated: 'That she, Manal, she sewed the dress in the lounge.' A first glance, we can see that the clitic ah spelled out on the complementizer ʔinn and the pronoun hi, all contribute to the discourse interpretation of the propositional content of the clause, indicating that we deal with an extra-linguistic level of language. In (3, 4), then, we have three referential items ah, spelled out on ʔinn and the pronoun hi, both of which are co-indexed and associated with the subject DP Manal.
With further investigation to the structure in (3, 4), is that there seems to be constraints held on its syntax. Consider (5): Roughly translated as: 'That she, Manal, SHE (not some other girl) sewed the dress in the lounge.' It can be deduced from (5) that the expressiveness devices each is licenced in a certain position in syntax, where it is licit at the interfaces. Furthermore, endowed with phonological or morphosyntactic import, these items seem to be conditioned at the pragmatic-phono-syntactic interface system. For instance, the pronoun is allowed to co-occur with the subject DP, merged to the right of it as in (3, 4). However, it is only allowed to the left of the subject DP when it is contrastively stressed as in (5).
Another fact demonstrated by these data is that merging more agreeing articulated structure in the clause seems to show more about the nature of the interface conditions and constraints imposed on the syntax of NHA. This can be captured when an agreeing demonstrative is added into the numeration of the clause in (5), as shown in (6). The demonstrative haði agrees in φ-features with the subject DP Manal, turning the left periphery of the clause rich at PF with spelling out expressive notions, spelling φ-features information and rich at LF interface, containing several discourse-related notions. The next section discusses the syntactic observations evidenced in (6), exploring the syntactic positions the expressiveness devices have in syntax, highlighting on the constraints held on their positioning in narrow syntax and their full interpretation at the interfaces.

Exploring the Data and Analysing the Linguistic Properties
Given the fact that the lexical verb moves to T, as the received view in Arabic in general terms (Ouhalla, 1994), in all examples above it follows that the preverbal thematic subject DP Manal moves to Spec of TP when surfing preverbally. Follows directly from this is fact the preverbal subject is in the CP domain, which can be captured by the observation that the contrastively stressed pronoun HI intervenes between the preverbal subject DP and the lexical verb (Note 3). Given that the demonstrative haði precedes the subject DP Manal, haði is indeed in CP. Notice in passing, interestingly, that both the clitic ah on ʔinn and the demonstrative haði agree in φ-features with the subject DP Manal. Notice also that any other order, containing these agreeing syntactic items, is disallowed in NHA grammar. The next sub-section touches on the main arguments triggered by the syntax of (6), including what seems to be an instance of multiple agreement.

Mechanisms of Agreement
Let us first consider the observation that two items c-commanding the subject DP Manal overtly agree with it in φ-features and how the mechanisms of the current theory can account for this. Firstly, it is not huge leap to assume that the subject DP is in the left periphery, given that it is immediately followed by a contrastively stressed pronoun HI. Being contrastively stressed, one would immediately stipulate that HI expresses new,  Vol. 10,No. 5; ipulation is dir d by the subjec an argument I the complemen pose that HI in ng the case, ( ey contribute t mata in (7) sho n present on Fo rocess results th the consequ by marking the nine expressed DP at a certain ntrastively stre contrastive st will be explain n (7) conditioned by the interface system, both sound and thought. Agreement is available in syntax, reducing movement as much as possible and allowing for it only when syntax requires so, for reasons related to the optimal structure of the faculty of language.

Generative Generalisations
A few assumptions can further be gleaned from the syntax of the structure investigated in this paper and be extended to natural language. One is the fact that movement operations, applied in syntax for interpretive properties and discourse values, are conditioned by the interface systems. Movement is not free in a sense that it is activated when an agreement relation is present, resulting in a spec head configuration to agreement. Thus, an item can serve as a proper goal and be probed if it is properly visible to the probing item. In the same vein, it must move if it needs to get a value to an unvalued feature on it or if there is a need to value one up in the structure. This property of syntax immediately supports the assumption that movement presupposes agreement (Chomsky, 2001). What this research also raises is the fact that computation is quite flexible when it comes to agreement by probe-goal relation in that it allows a probing head to practice probing a goal through another, c-commanded, probe, hence, optimality of natural language.

Conclusion
This research has offered an investigation to a linguistic phenomenon, where multiple occurrences of expressiveness devices, clitic, pronoun and demonstrative, co-occur, mark and agree with a DP. Exploring a set of data from NHA, it was shown that each instance of expressiveness devices instantiates its own syntactic projection, phrasal or head, and each involves certain information related to discourse. In syntax, it is generalised that multiple probing takes places, in which case two probes probe a single goal. It was also shown that in this case, while the upper probe probes through the lower probe, visibility is not problematic in the higher goal is visible to the higher prob. Deduced for the analyses held is the fact that grammar of NHA allows syntax to have instances of multiple agreement but imposes constrains and conditions for that. For instance, only two probing heads can be adjacent. In case there is a further probing head in the c-commanding domain of the two adjacent probing heads, the goal is not visible and movement of the goal is triggered. This might suggest that in the CP domain, there is a constraint managing the number of goals with respect to visibility. output of research has advanced the assumption that CP in NHA is rich with articulates discourse spines.