Skip Navigation

Journal of Semitic Studies 2009 54(2):537-573; doi:10.1093/jss/fgp012
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dickins, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

©The author. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the University of Manchester. All rights reserved.

Articles

Relative Clauses in Sudanese Arabic

James Dickins

University of Salford

This paper begins with a consideration of the nature of referentiality. A distinction is drawn between objective reference, which exists outside language, and subjective reference, which I argue may be imposed on the world by language. I argue that while agreement is a grammatical phenomenon, as traditionally believed, it has close links with the notion of subjective reference. On the basis of this, I argue that definiteness is a properly referential, and denotative phenomenon. I go on to show that the relative ‘elements’ such as alladi and illi which occur in various varieties of Arabic are not pronouns, but rather markers of definiteness, and that al- in Sudanese Arabic can be regarded as a ‘defi-nite particle’. I argue that in Sudanese al- is the head of its phrase, and consider the referentiality of al- in the dialect. I then consider demonstratives as secondary relative clause markers in Sudanese, and non-restrictive relative clauses in the dialect. I finally consider cases in which the al- head of a relative clause is not co-referential with the element (particularly an adjectival element) which follows it.

The theoretical analysis provided in this paper is based — somewhat informally — on the linguistic theory of axiomatic functionalism initially developed by J.W.F. Mulder and S.G.J. Hervey (e.g. Mulder 1968, 1989; Mulder and Hervey 1972, 1980; Hervey 1979, 1982), and subsequently extended on the basis of proposals put forward by Michael Lamb in Dickins (1998). In an attempt to keep the main body of the paper as generally comprehensible as possible, I have confined technical comments relating to axiomatic functionalism to footnotes.2


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.