Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2026 / The syntax of wh-agreement in Yemeni Ibbi Arabic

The syntax of wh-agreement in Yemeni Ibbi Arabic

Summary

The paper describes and formally analyzes wh-agreement in Yemeni Ibbi Arabic (YIA), a little-studied dialect spoken in Ibb Governorate, Yemen. In this dialect, wh-questions carry agreement marking at many points along the dependency: on the wh-operator, the complementizer, and the verbal heads (T/V, v). The authors argue that this is the first treatment of the phenomenon in any Arabic variety. Working within minimalist Phase Theory, they propose an "Agree across phases" (AAP) account built on Feature Inheritance. In this account, establishing an Agree relation (MATCHING, done by phase heads C and v) is separated from actually valuing features (which happens on T and V). The markers -eh, -uh, -nen and -um are traced to Standard Arabic third-person pronouns that became agreement morphology. The analysis is then extended to Greek, Indonesian, Palauan and Irish. The authors conclude that YIA shows a denser and more obligatory agreement chain than those languages, and they present this as support for AAP as a general account of long-distance dependencies.

Key points

  • Agreement suffixes -eh, -uh, -nen and -um appear on Wh-Op, C, T/V and v. The authors treat them as grammaticalized descendants of Standard Arabic 3rd-person pronouns.
  • The prefix li- is analyzed as a reduced relative pronoun acting as a C-element (relativizer clitic). It is obligatory with inanimate mu-hu ('what') but optional with human man-uh ('who').
  • The authors propose that the wh-operator stops in Spec,VP before reaching Spec,CP, for reasons of Case licensing and locality.
  • In YIA the resumptive-like -uh is described as a mandatory product of long-distance agreement, not an optional island-repair strategy as in Greek.
  • The data are hand-glossed example sentences, with no corpus or quantitative evaluation. The NLP implications section names MARBERT and XLM-R as models that could be fine-tuned on such dialect data.

Interesting ideas

  • I1. The analysis decouples two steps: first deciding that two positions are linked (matching), then copying feature values along that link (valuation). Each step can be checked and debugged on its own. — For Mova (frames): Coreference and agreement checking could first propose a link, then propagate number/gender/animacy as a separate, logged step, so a wrong value can be traced to either the link or the propagation.
  • I2. Agreement marks every intermediate stop of a long-distance wh-dependency, so morphology becomes a visible breadcrumb trail showing where the moved phrase originated. — For Mova (tree): The parser could use the agreement cues English does have (e.g., verb number after an extracted subject in embedded clauses) as explicit evidence for placing the gap of a fronted wh-phrase.
  • I3. A form that looks like a pronoun may have become pure agreement. Treating it as an argument would wrongly create a second participant. — For Mova (frames): Resumptive or doubled pronouns could be flagged as feature carriers rather than new arguments, so who-did-what-to-whom frames do not acquire duplicate roles.
  • I4. Whether an element is obligatory can depend on a semantic feature of the operator: li- is required with non-human 'what' but optional with human 'who'. — For Mova (world): Animacy/specificity features from the ontology could be used as conditions in rules for optional function words, explaining why a form appears or is omitted.
  • I5. The authors test their mechanism by reapplying it to several unrelated languages, treating cross-language coverage as a check on how general it is. — For Mova (learn): Self-induced repair rules could be validated across several treebanks or UD dialects before adoption, rejecting rules that only fit one source.

Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.

Fields: Linguistics & languages

Cite

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2607.04986 · arXiv 2607.04986

@misc{naji2026syntax,
  title = {{The syntax of wh-agreement in Yemeni Ibbi Arabic}},
  author = {Naji, Ashraf and Shormani, Mohammed Q.},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2607.04986},
  eprint = {2607.04986},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2607.04986}
}

References

102 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Abels K (2019) On “sluicing” with apparent massive pied-piping. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 37(4), pp.1205–1242. find
  2. Abels K, Dayal V (2023) On the syntax of multiple sluicing and what it tells us about wh-scope taking. Linguistic inquiry 54.(3): 429-477. find
  3. Adger D, (2007) Three domains of finiteness: A minimalist perspective. In: Irina. Nikolaeva (ed.). Finiteness: Theoretical and empirical foundations. Oxford University Press, pp.23– 58. find
  4. Agbayani B, Ochi M (2023) Split lexical insertion in parasitic gap constructions. Studia Linguistica 77.(2): 219-257. find
  5. Al-Balushi R (2011) Case in Standard Arabic: The Untraveled Paths. University of Toronto. (Doctoral dissertation) Alexiadou A, Anagnostopoulou E (2001) Covert Feature-Movement and the Placement of Arguments. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science Series 4, pp.175–190. find
  6. Al-Rawi M M (2019) Are adjectives phrases phases? Evidence from Arabic. International Journal of Arabic Linguistics, 5(2), pp.130–150. find
  7. Alshaalan Y, Abels K (2020) Resumption as a sluicing source in Saudi Arabic: Evidence from sluicing with prepositional phrases. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 5(1). find our card
  8. Aoun J, Hornstein N, Sportiche D (1981). Aspects of Wide Scope Interpretation. Journal of Linguistic Research, 1, pp.69–95. find
  9. Aoun J, Choueiri L (1997) Resumption and last resort. Ms., University of Southern California. find
  10. Aoun J, Li, Y.H.A (2003) Essays on the representational and derivational nature of grammar: The diversity of wh-constructions. MIT Press. find
  11. Aoun J (2000) Resumption and last resort. DELTA: Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 16(spe), 13-43. find
  12. Aoun J E, Benmamoun E, Choueiri L (2010) The syntax of Arabic. Cambridge University Press. find
  13. Bhatt R, Keine S (2017) Long‐distance agreement. In: Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.). The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Wiley-Blackwell. find
  14. Bobaljik J, Wurmbrand S (2008) Word Order and Scope. Transparent Interfaces and the 3/4 Signature. Ms., University of Connecticut. find
  15. Boeckx C (2003) Islands and Chains: Resumption as stranding. find
  16. John Benjamins Boeckx C (2004) Long‐distance agreement in Hindi: Some theoretical implications. Studia linguistica, 58(1), pp.23-36. find
  17. Boeckx C (2009a) Understanding minimalist syntax: Lessons from locality in long-distance dependencies. John Wiley & Sons. find
  18. Boeckx C (2009b) Language in cognition: Uncovering mental structures and the rules behind them. John Wiley & Sons. find
  19. Boeckx C, Grohmann K K (2007) Remark: Putting phases in perspective. Syntax, 10(2), pp.204-222. find
  20. Bondevik I, Kush D, Lohndal T (2021) Variation in adjunct islands: The case of Norwegian. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 44(3), pp.223–250. find
  21. Bošković Ž (2007) On the locality and motivation of Move and Agree: An even more minimal theory. Linguistic inquiry, 38(4), pp.589–644. find
  22. Bošković Ž (2014) Now I’m a Phase, now I’m not a phase: on the variability of phases with extraction and ellipsis. Linguistic Inquiry, 45(1), pp.27–89. find
  23. Bošković Ž (2016) Getting Really Edgy: On the Edge of the Edge. Linguistic Inquiry, 47(1), pp.1–45. find
  24. Branan K, Erlewine M Y (2024) Ā-probing for the closest DP. Linguistic Inquiry, 55(2), pp.375–401. find
  25. Brustad K (2000) Spoken Arabic. Georgetown University Press. find
  26. Carstens V (2005) Agree and EPP in Bantu. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 23(2), pp.219–279. find
  27. Chaves R P, Dery J E (2019) Frequency effects in subject islands. Journal of linguistics, 55(3), 475-521. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226718000294 ↗
  28. Cheng LL-S (2025) Ā-dependencies and Successive Cyclic Movement. In: Barbiers S, Corver N, Polinsky M (eds). The Cambridge Handbook of Comparative Syntax. Cambridge University Press, pp. 792-823. find
  29. Chomsky N (1977) On wh-movement. In: Peter Culicover & Adrian Akmajian & Thomas Wasow eds. Formal syntax. New York: Academic Press, pp.71–132. find
  30. Chomsky N (1986) Barriers (Vol. 13). MIT press. find
  31. Chomsky N (1995) The minimalist program. MIT Press. find
  32. Chomsky N (2000) Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In: Roger M, David M, Juan U eds. Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. MIT Press, pp.89– 155. find
  33. Chomsky N (2001) Derivation by phase. In: M. Kenstowicz, ed. Ken Hale: A life in language. MIT Press, pp.1–52. find
  34. Chomsky N (2005) Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(1), pp.1–22. find
  35. Chomsky N (2007) Approaching UG from below. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. find
  36. Chomsky N (2008) On phases. In: R. Freidin, C. Otero and M.L. Zubizarreta, eds. Foundational issues in linguistic theory: Essays in honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud. MIT Press, pp.133–160. find
  37. Chomsky N (2013) Problems of projection. lingua, 130, pp.33-49. find
  38. Chomsky N (2021) Minimalism: Where are we now, and where can we hope to go. Gengo Kenkyu (Journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan), 160, pp.1-41. find
  39. Choueiri L G (2002) Issues in the syntax of resumption: Restrictive relatives in Lebanese Arabic. University of Southern California. find
  40. Chung S (1994) wh-agreement and referentiality in Chamorro. Linguistic inquiry, 25(1), pp.1– 44. find
  41. Citko B (2014) Phase theory: An introduction. Cambridge University Press. find
  42. Den Dikken M (2005) Comparative correlatives comparatively. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(4), 497-532. find
  43. Dickins J (2009) Relative Clauses in Sudanese Arabic. Journal of Semitic studies, 54(2), pp.537–573. find
  44. Diercks M (2013) Indirect agree in Lubukusu complementizer agreement. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 31, pp.357–407. find
  45. Doliana A (2022) Wh quantifier float in German. Syntax, 25(3), pp.335–378. find
  46. Fischer, S., 2018. Locality, control, and non-adjoined islands. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 3(1). find
  47. Frampton J, Gutmann S (2006) How sentences grow in the mind: Agreement and selection in an efficient minimalist syntax. In Cedric Boeckx, (ed.), Agreement Systems, 121-157. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. find
  48. Galal M (2004) Relativizer ‘illi’ in Arabic Dialects. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 27, pp.44–65. find
  49. Gallego Á J (2017) Multiple wh-movement in European Spanish. In: Boundaries, Phases, and Interfaces: Case Studies in Honor of Violeta Demonte. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.195–222. find
  50. Gallego Á J (ed) (2012) Phases: Developing the framework. De Gruyter. find
  51. Hansen MBM, Visconti J (eds) (2014) The grammaticalization of negative indefinites: the case of the temporal/aspectual n-words plus and mais in Medieval French. In: The diachrony of negation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.185–212. find
  52. Heck F, Richards M (2010) A probe-goal approach to agreement and non-incorporation restrictions in Southern Tiwa. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 28(3), pp.681–721. find
  53. Hein J, Murphy A (2020) Case matching and syncretism in ATB‐dependencies. Studia Linguistica, 74(2), pp.254–283. find
  54. Hein J (2024) Category-sensitive escape from islands in Limbum and Asante Twi. Languages, 9(10). find
  55. Jeoung H (2020) Wh-agreement Across Three Domains in Indonesian," University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 26 (1), pp115-123. find
  56. Kayne R (1985) L'accord du participe passe en franc;ais et en italien. Modeles linquistiques 7, 1: 73-89. find
  57. Koopman H, Sportiche D (1991) Theta-theory and extraction. In GLOW Newsletter 14:57– 58, reprinted In Partitions and Atoms of Clause Structure: Subjects, agreement, case and clitics (2005, pp. 402-404). Routledge. find
  58. Keine S, Zeijlstra H (2025) Clause-internal successive cyclicity: Phasality or DP intervention?. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 43(3). find
  59. Krivochen D (2021) NEG lowering into quantifiers. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, 53(1), pp.91– 125. find
  60. Lakoff G (1971) On Generative Semantics. Semantics: An interdisciplinary reader in philosophy, linguistics and psychology. 232–296. find
  61. Larson R (1988) On the Double Object Construction. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, pp.335–391. find
  62. Lochbihler B, Mathieu E (2013) Wh-agreement in Ojibwe relative clauses: evidence for CP structure. Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 58(2), pp.293–318. find
  63. Lochbihler B, Mathieu É (2016) Clause typing and feature inheritance of discourse features. Syntax, 19(4), pp.354–391. find
  64. Lucas C (2015) On Wilmsen on the development of postverbal negation in dialectal Arabic. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 17, pp.77–95. find
  65. Miyagawa S (2009) Why agree? Why move?: Unifying agreement-based and discourse-configurational languages. MIT Press. find
  66. Müller G (2001) Order Preservation, Parallel Movement, and the Emergence of the Unmarked. In: Géraldine L, Jane G, Sten V, (eds) Optimality-Theoretic Syntax. MIT Press, pp.279– 313. find
  67. Müller G (2011) Constraints on displacement: A phase-based approach. John Benjamins. find
  68. Ott D (2015) Symmetric Merge and local instability: Evidence from split topics. Syntax, 18(2), pp.157–192. find
  69. Ouhalla J (1999) Introducing Transformational Grammar: from Principles and. Parameters to Minimalism. Edward Arnold press. find
  70. Ouhalla J (2004) Semitic relatives. Linguistic inquiry, 35(2), pp.288–300. find
  71. Panagiotidis E P (ed) (2010) The complementizer phase: Subjects and operators. OUP Oxford. find
  72. Pañeda C, Lago S, Vares E, Veríssimo J, Felser C (2020) Island effects in Spanish comprehension. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 5(1). find
  73. Pesetsky D, Torrego E (2007) The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features. Phrasal and clausal architecture, pp.262–294. find
  74. Pesetsky D (1987) Binding problems with experiencer verbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 18(1), pp.126– 140. find
  75. Reeve M, Hicks G (2017) Adjunct extraposition: Base generation or movement?. Syntax, 20(3), pp.215–256. find
  76. Ren F, Yan C Q (2024) D-linkability of Mandarin wh-nominals: A morphosyntactic account. In: The 36th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics. find
  77. Richards M D (2012) Probing the past: On reconciling long-distance agreement with the PIC. Local modelling of non-local dependencies in syntax, pp.135–154. find
  78. Richards N (2008) Defective Intervention and wh-Movement. Linguistic Inquiry, 39(4), pp.565–597. find
  79. Rizzi L (1990) Relativized minimality. The MIT Press. find
  80. Rizzi L (1997) The fine structure of the left periphery. In Elements of grammar: Handbook in generative syntax (pp. 281-337). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. find
  81. Rizzi L (2004) Locality and left periphery. In: Structures and beyond: The cartography of syntactic structures 3, pp.223–251. find
  82. Roberts I (2010) Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation, and defective goals. MIT Press. find
  83. Ross J R (1967) Constraints on variables in syntax. MIT. (Ph.D Dissertation). find
  84. Rouveret A (2008) Phasal agreement and reconstruction. Current Studies in Linguistics Series, 45, p.167. find
  85. Rouveret A (ed) (2015) Arguments minimalistes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de Vincennes. find
  86. Rouveret A (2016) Intervention or phasal locality?. In: Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 10. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp.233–260. find
  87. Rudin C (1988) On multiple questions and multiple wh-fronting. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6, pp.455–501. find
  88. Shibata N, Yashima J (2014) Reference-set computation in children: Mandarin-speaking children’s pronoun interpretation in Avoid Pronoun contexts. Language Acquisition, 21(3), pp.304–332. find
  89. Shlonsky U (1991) Quantifiers as functional heads: A study of quantifier float in Hebrew. Lingua, 84(2-3), pp.159–180. find
  90. Shormani MQ, Al Hussen FS (2024) The syntax of negative imperatives in Yemeni Arabic: A phase approach.    , 11(1), p.2291845. find
  91. Shormani MQ (2016) Are noun phrases phases? Evidence from Semitic construct state. International Journal of Arabic Linguistics, 2(2), pp.96–132. find
  92. Shormani MQ (2017) SVO, silent topics and the interpretation of referential pro: A discourse-syntax interface approach. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 29(2), pp.91–159. find
  93. Shormani MQ (2019) Vocatives in Yemeni Ibbi Arabic: Functions, types and approach. Journal of Semitic Studies, 64(1), pp.221–250. find
  94. Sigurðsson H Á, Holmberg A (2008) Icelandic dative intervention: Person and number are separate probes. In: Agreement restrictions, pp.251–280. find
  95. Sigurðsson H Á, Maling J (2010) The empty left edge condition. In: M.T. Putnam, ed. Exploring crash-proof grammars. John Benjamins, pp.59–86. find
  96. Sportiche D (1988) A theory of floating quantifiers and its corollaries for constituent structure. Linguistic inquiry, 19(3), pp.425-449. find
  97. Szabolcsi A, Lohndal T (2017) Strong vs. Weak Islands. In: M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk, eds. The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax. Wiley-Blackwell. find
  98. Szabolcsi A (2006) Strong vs. weak islands. In: The Blackwell companion to syntax, pp.479– 531. find
  99. Tsimpli I M, Dimitrakopoulou M (2007) The interpretability hypothesis: Evidence from wh-interrogatives in second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 23(2), pp.215– 242. find
  100. Woods R (2012) Thoughts on Multiple Wh-Fronting in Czech. Available from https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/6/article/550012/pdf ↗
  101. Woolford E (2006) Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic inquiry, 37(1), pp.111–130. find
  102. Yoda S (2005) The Arabic dialect of the Jews in Tripoli (Libya): Grammar, text and glossary. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag. find

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/naji-2026-syntax-wh-agreement-yemeni-ibbi/