It is well documented that there is a one-to-many relationship between Arabic and English genitival constructions. However, it is unclear whether, given this syntactic variation, such constructions show equivalence in semantic function. For this purpose, a corpus-based contrastive analysis of these genitive constructions in a bilingual novel is carried out. As a prelude to a quantitative and qualitative inspection of the data, the (non)interchangeability of the alternative English genitives is determined by eliciting intuitive judgments from 10 linguistically naïve native speakers of British English. Quantitatively, the study shows that the Arabic genitive almost covers the semantic functions expressed by the various English genitives found in the corpus. Qualitatively, the study reveals that the flexibility derived from the English genitive variation, as opposed to the fixed word order of the Arabic genitive, allows the speaker to convey additional meaning. However, the Arabic genitive which employs various formal devices such as overt markers of case, gender, number, definiteness and person can express the same semantic functions. These features render Arabic functional with one genitive and require English to vary its genitive relative to certain phonological, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic conditions.
Abdul-Raof, H. 1998. Subject, theme and agent in modern standard Arabic. Surrey: Curzon Press.
Al-Aboudi, F. 1985. The Syntax of ?idafah’, Annexation in Arabic. PhD Thesis, Indiana University.
Al-Shaer, I. 2001. Prototype Theory and Construction Grammar. PhD Thesis, University of Reading.
Altenberg, B. 1982. The Genitive vs. the Of-Construction: A Study of Syntactic Variation in 17th Century English. PhD Thesis. Lund Studies in English 62,Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech G., Conrad S. and Finegan E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Chomsky, N. 1972. “Remarks on Nominalisation”. In: Studies on Semantics in Generative Grammar. The Hague, Paris: Mouton.
Durieux, F. 1990. “The Meanings of the Specifying Genitive in English: A Cognitive Analysis”. Antwerp University Papers in Linguistics No. 66 1990.
Goldberg, Adele1995. Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Halliday, M. 1989Spoken and Written Language. New York, Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Harning, K. 1980. The Analytic Genitive in the modern Arabic Dialects. Gothoburgensis, Acta Universitatis.
Hawkins, R. 1981. “Towards an account of the possessive constructions: NP’s N and N of NP1”. Journal of Linguistics 17(1):247–269.
Hinrichs, L. and Szmrecsanyi B. 2007. “Recent changes in the function and frequency of standard English genitive constructions: a multivariate analysis of tagged corpora”. English Language and Linguistics 11(3):437–474.
Jackendoff, R. 1968. “Possessives in English”. In Studies in Transformational Grammar and Related Topics, Anderson S., Jackendoff R., and Keyser S. (eds), 25–51. Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University Press.
Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Langacker, R. 1987. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 11, California: Stanford University Press
Leech, G. 1981. Semantics (2nd ed.) Harmonsworth: Penguin Book.
Lyons, C. 1986. “The Syntax of the English Genitive Constructions”. Journal of Linguistics 22(1):123–43.
Lyons, C. 1999. Definiteness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Osselton, N. 1988. “Thematic genitives”. In: An Historic Tongue: studies in {English} Linguistics in Memory of Barbara Strang, Nixon G. and Honey J. (eds),London: Routledge.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., and Svartvik, J. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of English Language, Essex: Longman.
Rosenbach, A. 2005. “Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English”. Language 81(3):613–644.
Rosenbach, A. 2006. “Descriptive genitives in English: a case study on constructional gradience”. English Language and Linguistics 10(1):77–118
Ryding, K. 2005. A Reference Grammar of Modern Standard Arabic. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stefanowitsch, A. 2003. “Constructional semantics as a limit to grammatical alternation: The two genitives of English”. In: Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, Günter Rohdenburg and Britta Mohndorf (eds), 413–441. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Suleiman, S. 1989. “On the Pragmatics of subject-Object Preposing in Standard Arabic”. Language Sciences 11(2):215–235.
Taylor, J.R. 1991. “Possessive Genitives in English: A Discourse Perspective”. South African Journal of Linguistics 91:59–63.
Taylor, J.R. 1996. Possessives in English: An Exploration in Cognitive Grammar, New York: Oxford University Press.
Thackston, W. 1964. An Introduction to Koranic and Classical Arabic. Maryland: Iranbooks.
Wasow, T. 2002. Postverbal Behavior. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Liao, Jing, Ning An & Yongyan Zheng
2020. What Motivates L3 Learners’ Investment and/or Divestment in Arabic? Understanding Learning Motivation in terms of “Identity”. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 84 ► pp. 27 ff.
Azaz, Mahmoud
2017. Metalinguistic Knowledge of Salient vs. Unsalient Features: Evidence From the Arabic Construct State. Foreign Language Annals 50:1 ► pp. 214 ff.
Azaz, Mahmoud
2020. Structural surface overlap and derivational complexity in crosslinguistic transfer: Acquisition of English genitive alternation by Egyptian Arabic-speaking learners. Second Language Research 36:4 ► pp. 529 ff.
Azaz, Mahmoud & Joshua Frank
2017. The role of perceptual salience in the L2 acquisition sequence of the Arabic construct state. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 27:3 ► pp. 621 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.