Identifying N+N compounding in Modern Standard Arabic and Jordanian Arabic

Abstract

This study aims to identify types of compounds in Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) and Jordanian Arabic (JA) by applying the cross‐linguistic criteria for compoundhood discussed in the relevant literature, with a special focus on English and Hebrew. These criteria – orthographic, phonological, syntactic and semantic in nature – have been proposed to make a distinction between compounds and phrases cross‐linguistically. The analysis reveals that the most reliable cross‐linguistic criteria to distinguish between compounds and phrases in MSA and JA are adjacency and referentiality. With regard to the former criterion, no intervening elements can be inserted between the head and the non‐head of compounds, whilst such insertion is allowed in phrases. With regard to the latter criterion, the non‐head of a compound is normally non‐referential, whereas the non‐head of a phrase is always referential. Other criteria have been found to be partially applicable, e.g. compositionality, possibilities for modification and coordination, and free pluralisation of the non‐head. In this study, I also suggest two reliable criteria that are exclusive to Arabic, or potentially Semitic languages in general. The first criterion is the appearance/absence of the possessive marker li‐/la ‘for/of’ when the first element is definite. The second criterion deals with the appearance/absence of the possessive marker li‐/la ‘for/of’ when the first element is preceded by a cardinal number. The study concludes with recommendations for further research.

Headedness in Arabic Compounds within the Synthetic Genitive Construction

“…In this section, I look closely at Arabic compounds within the SGC on the basis of Altakhaineh’s (2016a, pp. 134-135, 172) analysis in which he suggests that a SGC compound can be defined as a complex word that consists of at least two adjacent words, and where the second element is normally non-referential.…”

“…134-135, 172) analysis in which he suggests that a SGC compound can be defined as a complex word that consists of at least two adjacent words, and where the second element is normally non-referential. Altakhaineh (2016a) also notes that the second element of a compound within the SGC is not, in most cases, freely pluralized, as in the following examples:…”

“…The examples of Arabic compounds within SGC (see “Applying Headedness Criteria to Arabic Compounds Within the SGC” section) used in this study were collected from different sources: (a) Arabic books discussing the SGC (e.g., Al-Jurjaani, 2004), (b) the relevant literature on SGC (e.g., Altakhaineh, 2016a, 2016b; Fassi Fehri, 2012), (c) some Arabic newspapers (e.g., Al-Ghad), and (d) my intuition as a native speaker of Arabic. More than 500 examples were collected, and these were categorized into compounds and phrases based on whether the relationship between the two elements is based on possession.…”

“…More than 500 examples were collected, and these were categorized into compounds and phrases based on whether the relationship between the two elements is based on possession. In other words, all genitive constructions were excluded, since they are regarded as phrases, rather than compounds (see Altakhaineh, 2016a, pp. 6-7).…”

“…In this study, however, I opted for the term Synthetic Genitive Construction , which contrasts with “analytic genitives,” that is, with the possessive markers, for example, li “for/of” in MSA. In fact, the “Construct State” refers to the morphological form of the possessum in a construct, for example, the lack of nunation and in some Arabic dialects, for example, Jordanian Arabic, the feminine suffix surfacing with a final /t/, and so on (see Altakhaineh 2016a, pp. 6-7).…”