melissa troyer - broken plural formation in moroccan arabic

8/9/2019 Melissa Troyer - Broken Plural Formation in Moroccan Arabic

1/28

Broken plural formation in Moroccan Arabic

Melissa [email protected]

May 1, 2006

Submitted in partial requirements of L544

Abstract

This paper will inspect the different forms of plurals evident in Moroccan Arabic, namely soundand broken plurals. Sound plurals, which are generally formed by adding a suffix to a singularstem, lend themselves to an easier analysis than broken plurals, which are formed in numerousways by internally changing the stem and sometimes adding a suffix. It appears that two separatetypes of morphological processes are being utilized for the formation of these two types of plurals.This paper will show how the broken plurals of Moroccan Arabic, rather than demonstrating thesimple concatenation of the sound plurals, can be formed from their singular forms through aprosodic morphology approach similar to the approach posited by McCarthy & Prince (1990) for

the iambic broken plurals of standard Arabic. The analysis that there must be two types ofprocesses (one concatenative, one non-concatenative) that form plurals in Arabic is interestingbecause it demonstrates that speakers of Arabic seem to perform the same linguistic function(form a plural) through two separate processes.

1. Introduction

Arguments have been made that some languages are best represented by an item-and-

arrangement model which simply positions morphemes in a linear order. However, linguists

such as John McCarthy have proposed that languages like Arabic may be better described using

a prosodic morphology analysis which posits a skeletal template to which the root and the

inflectional vocalization (as well as prefixes and suffixes) are connected on separate tiers.

However, not all words (particularly, nouns) in these languages can be easily explained by the

template system originally posited by McCarthy (1981). Sound plurals are formed in both

standard and Moroccan Arabic by adding a suffix to the singular noun stem while broken plurals

involve an internal change in the stem in addition to a change in suffixes. For instance,

Moroccan Arabic sound plurals include relfoot ~ rel-infeet and bennayliar ~ bennay-a

liars, and its broken plurals includefendeqhotel ~fnadeqhotels, berradteapot ~ brared

teapots, and bermilbarrel ~ bramelbarrels or bentgirl ~ bnat girls, kelbdog ~ klab


2/28

2

dogs, and moxxbrain ~ mxaxbrains. Two morphological processes are utilized in plural

formation, one of which is simple concatenation and the other of which seems to be more similar

to the root-and-template prosodic approach taken by McCarthy (1979, 1981). It seems that

Moroccan Arabic broken plural formation is based on another type of prosodic, autosegmental

morphology that does not use root-to-template mapping but rather a word-to-template mapping

similar to the standard Arabic word-to-template mapping discussed in McCarthy and Prince

(1990).

2. Prosodic morphology in the standard Arabic verb

The prosodic morphology approach to the Arabic verb taken by McCarthy (1979, 1981) and

summarized by Katamba (1993) is briefly outlined below. The verb in Arabic has fifteen

derivational classes, or binyanim, which indicate certain meanings (such as causative, passive,

etc.) that are common across words of that particular binyan. Each binyan applies its own

vocalisms to (generally) tri-consonantal roots in Arabic, and each binyan may be conjugated in

perfective, imperfective, or participle forms. Some binyanim may be further conjugated in

different active and passive forms of the perfective, imperfective, and passive. McCarthy

compares this to the autosegmental phonology approach to tone spreading in tone languages. He

posits a skeletal tier, represented with consonant and vowel slots, to which the root letters are

applied at one level of representation (on the root tier) and to which the vocalism applies on a

separate vocalic melody tier. For instance, the root k-t-bmeans write, and its three-tier

representation for the first binyan active perfective form would be represented as in (1).1

1The following three-tiered representations are taken from Katamba (1993).


3/28

3

(1)

The result is kataba, meaning he wrote. The first binyan perfective passive is characterized by

the vocal melody u-i-a, which can be represented by the tier structure in (2).

(2)

The result is kutiba, meaning it was written. Ratcliffe (1998) describes this change from the

present morpheme [a] to the passive morpheme [u i] as a passivization rule: [a] >> [u, i]. There

are also situations where the number of consonants on the root tier is less than the number of

consonant slots on the skeletal tier; for instance, the second binyan has a causative meaning in

the perfective active form as in (3). The result is kattaba, meaning he cause to write.

(3)

These examples all demonstrate the direct mapping of the root and a vocal melody, which

indicates inflectional information, onto a skeletal template.

C V C C V C VSkeletal tier

k t b

Vocalic melody tier a

Root tier

C V C V C VSkeletal tier

k t b

Vocalic melody tier

Root tier

u i a

C V C V C V

a

Skeletal tier

k t b

Vocalic melody tier

Root tier


4/28

4

3. Iambic plurals in standard Arabic

McCarthy & Prince (1990) contend that it is not possible to derive the broken plural in classical

and standard Arabic from a simple mapping of the (usually) tri-consonantal root to a template.

Examples are given from the iambic broken plural forms in standard Arabic, which is held to be

the only largely productive plural form in Arabic. Though McCarthy & Prince submit that the

general format of the iambic plural form (CVCVV-) lends itself to a templatic analysis, they

argued that a traditional root-to-template analysis does not work well with these forms but rather

that a word-to-template mapping from the singular form to the plural form occurs. The primary

reason for this argument is that information from the singular stem is carried over to the plural

forms, and therefore the plural forms may not be described simply in terms of root and template.

The root itself does not encompass all of the information that must be carried over. For instance,

in some cases the number of moras in the singular base determines the number of syllables that

will be present in the broken plural form. In Arabic, a light syllable (CV) is equal to one mora

and a heavy syllable (CVV or CVC) is equal to two moras. A word-final consonant is

extrametrical. The following example illustrates that it is the number of moras, and not the

number of syllables, that determines the number of syllables in the plural. A bimoraic but

monosyllabic word like nafs(where the first mora = na, the second mora =f, and the final

consonant sis extrametrical) predicts a disyllabic broken plural, nu.fuus. A bimoraic word like

!a.sad(where the first mora = !a, the second mora =sa, and the final consonant dis

extrametrical) predicts a disyllabic plural, !u.suud. A trimoraic but disyllabic word likejun.dub

(where the first mora =ju, the second mora = n, the third mora = du, and the final consonant is

extrametrical)predicts a trisyllabic broken plural,ja.naa.dib. These words are given in (4).


5/28

5

(4) Singular Plural Glossa. nafs (bimoraic) nu.fuus (disyllabic) soul

b. !a.sad (bimoraic) !u.suud (disyllabic) lionc. jun.dub (trimoraic) ja.naa.dib (trisyllabic) locust

Another piece of evidence described that word-to-template rather than root-to-template

mapping takes place in the formation of broken plurals is that vowel length in the final syllable

of the plural form is predicted by the final syllable vowel length in the singular form, as shown in

the following data.

(5) Singular Plural Gloss

a. jundub janaadib (short final syllable) locustb. sulTaan salaaTiin (long final syllable) sultan

Similarly, in some tri-consonantal roots which require a default consonant (the glide [w])

in their plural form, the location of this default consonant is predictable based on the location of

a long vowel in the singular form. If the singular form contains a long vowel in its first syllable,

then the default consonant is realized as the onset of the second syllable in the plural form, and if

the singular form contains a long vowel in its second position, then the default consonant is

realized as the onset of the third syllable in the plural form. If root-to-template mapping were

occurring, there would be no explanation for the predictability of this default consonant

placement. A word-to-template analysis is therefore necessary to explain the transfer of

information from the singular to the plural form. Examples of obligatory consonant insertion are

given in (6).


6/28

6

(6) Singular Plural Glossa. xaatam xawaatim signet ring

([w] realized as second syllable onset)b. saHaab-at2saHaawib cloud

([w] realized as third syllable onset)

Another indication that root-to-template mapping is not at work in broken plural

formation is that reduplication of a single root encoded in the singular form is also found in the

plural form. This information can only be found in the singular form of the noun and not in the

root.3 Examples of nouns with reduplication of a root are given in (7).

(7) Singular Plural Root Glossa. zalzal-at zalaazil /zl/ earthquakeb. judjud jadaajid /jd/ cricket

Like the transfer of reduplication, information about how a specific roots consonants are

spread in a particular noun is carried from the singular form to the plural form. This information

is not available at the root level, so a root-to-template analysis does not suffice. Examples are

given in (8).

(8) Singular Plural Root Glossa. nuwwaar nawaawiir /nwr/ white flowersb. tinniin tanaaniin /tn/ sea monster

The root /nwr/ white flowers thus spreads its second consonant to two positions in the singular

and the plural, whereas /tn/ sea monster spreads its final consonant to the final three positions

in both the singular and the plural. This information is only from the idiosyncratic properties of

the singular form and not from the root itself.

2The morpheme -atat the end of a word in standard Arabic is a feminine gender marker.3The roots listed here are noted in McCarthy & Prince (1990) and are traditionally considered the underlying two-letter roots of these words.


7/28

7

Above, it has been seen that the number of moras in the singular form determines the

syllable structure of the plural form and that the absence or presence of a long vowel in the final

syllable of a singular form determines the length of the final syllable in the plural form. Default

consonant (the glide [w]) place also is predictable in the plural form based on the location of a

long vowel in the singular form. In addition, information about reduplication of the root and

consonant spreading from root consonants, two types of phenomena that can only be found at the

word-level of the singular form, is also transferred to the plural form. These pieces of

information are only available at the level of the singular word-form and not at the level of the

root. Therefore, it seems that the root-to-template mapping does not succeed in explaining

standard Arabic broken plural formation.

Instead of the type of root-to-template mapping seen with the different binyanim

described previously (e.g. root k-t-b write maps to different templates depending on whether it

is causative, passive, etc.), McCarthy & Prince (1990) posit a different sort of hypothesis for the

prosodic change from singular to plural verbs in standard Arabic morphology. Their analysis

involves the iambic broken plural forms, which constitute the large majority of broken plurals in

standard Arabic. The analysis involves first mapping the equivalent of the minimal word in

Arabic (two moras) from the singular form to a broken plural template and then replacing the

singular form vowels with the vocal melody of the broken plural form. For instance, in four-

consonant roots, the claim is that the first two moras (which can make up a minimal word in

Arabic) are the only part of the word available to be mapped to the new template. The vowel of

the first mora will spread through the word-initial iamb of the broken plural template, and the

first two onsets will be filled in by the two vowels of the first two moras. Then, the first vowel

of the vowel melody (for instance, the melody /a_i/) will be associated with the template of the


8/28

8

first iamb. Next, the rest of the singular form will be added, and the vowel of the singular form

will be replaced by the second vowel of the vocal melody. With the wordjilbaabtype of

garment, plural formjalaabiib, the first two moras of the singular form areji and l. It is argued

that these two moras are mapped to the first iamb of the template CVCVVCV(V)C, resulting in

the following representation4.

(10)

Above, FIindicates an iamb, !represents a syllable, and represents one mora (after the

remapping has taken place). The vowel from the first mora ofjilbaabis spread in the above

diagram, but McCarthy & Prince note that there can be no direct evidence for this, since it is

overwritten by the aof the /a_i/ plural melody (1990: 247). They contend that at first, the

original vowel is spread so that it may be overwritten; however, there is obviously no way to

prove this, and it may be the case that the /a/ of the underlying vocal melody merely spreads to

available spots in the initial iamb of the plural template. The replacement of the iofjilby the a

of the vocal melody is shown below.

4The following three diagrams are based on those in McCarthy & Prince (1990: 247-248) and use the samenotation.

! !

j

i

l

FI


9/28

9

(11)

Now, the second two moras,ba and a (where the final bis extrametrical), can be added to

the iambic template, and the second vowel of the vocal melody /a_i/ can be associated.

(12)

McCarthy & Prince note that this prosodic approach also accounts for the placement of

obligatory consonants in the broken plural. When singular forms have only one consonant in

their first two moras (such asxaatam, where the first two moras arexaand a), the iambic

template C1VC2VV- of the broken plural pattern will not have a consonant assigned to the C2

slot. The rest of the slots in the iambic template will be filled in as usual, and the vocal melody

/a_i/ replaces the original vowels ofxaatam; however, the C2slot is left unfilled. The final

broken plural form, however, isxawaatim. A similar pattern emerges with other similar three-

consonant singular forms, and McCarthy & Prince (1990: 249) explain the filling of the C 2onset

by the following:

! !

j

a

l

FI

i

!

b

b

! !

j

a

l

FI

i


10/28

10

(13) Consonantal Default Rule

!w, when required by syllabic well-formedness.

For singular forms such asjaziir-atisland, pluraljazaa!ir(/jazaawir/), McCarthy & Prince give

the explanation that after the first two moras (jazi) are associated with the iambic template

CVCVV-, the remaining part of the stem (-ir) is no longer an allowable syllable in Arabic all

syllables in Arabic require an onset. Therefore, an empty consonant slot is again filled by the

underlying obligatory consonant /w/, which is phonetically realized as a glottal stop5, giving

jazaa!ir.

In addition, monosyllabic singular forms like nafssoul, plural nufuushave broken

plural forms which are explained by McCarthy & Princes theory. A final consonant like the s

from nafsis extrametrical in Arabic, so it is not part of the two moras which will initially

associate with the iambic template of the broken plural. The vocalic melody /u/ thus acts as

normal, and the broken plural form nufuusis elucidated by the same analysis of the above iambic

broken plural forms.

The above illustrates some of the ways in which Arabic broken plurals are formed. The

transfer from the singular form to the plural form clearly works through different processes than

the straightforward root-to-template mapping found in other verb paradigms in Arabic. Rather,

the iambic broken plural forms discussed above are formed through a word-to-template mapping

from the singular form to the plural form.

5McCarthy & Prince (1990) cite Brame (1970: 244ff., 273) who explains this phonological rule in-depth.


11/28

11

4. The Moroccan Arabic broken plural

In Moroccan Arabic, like standard Arabic, most plural forms are broken plurals rather than sound

plurals. It is not usually predictable whether a given noun or adjective will have a broken or

sound plural, though certain patterns do emerge. A traditional concatenative morphology

approach can easily account for the formation of sound plurals. The three sound plural

morphemes in Moroccan Arabic are -in, -a, and -(a)t, as in (14)6,7.

(14) Singular Plural Glossa. rel rel-in foot

fer"h"an fer"h"an-in happy

b. bennay bennay-a liardnadni dnadniy-a musician

c. bnita binta-t little girlhdiya hdiya-t giftwab wab-at answermalik malik-at king

If a noun or adjective has a sound plural form, it is usually predictable what the form will be.

Harrell (2004) lists eleven different categories of words that form plurals ending in

-in, including participles from the first binyan (derivational class) when used as nouns, all nisba8

adjectives and some nisba nouns, all diminutive adjectives, ordinal numbers, adjectives with

certain root patterns in the singular, and a few adjectives and nouns with no common root

patterns in the singular. Words that form plurals ending in -aare fewer in number and include

nouns with the root patterns of professional or habitual activity and one four-consonant root

pattern. The words that have sound plural forms ending in -(a)tare normally nouns and include

6All Moroccan Arabic henceforth taken from Harrell (2004).7The diacritic found underneath the rand hof fer"h"an(as well as many other words throughout this paper) indicatean emphatic, or pharyngealized, consonant.8Nisbais a type of suffix (-iya)which is added to nouns to form adjectives related to the noun.


12/28

12

all diminutive forms, all nouns of unity which are derived from their collective counterparts,

nearly all nouns ending in the suffix -iya, nearly all nouns of a certain root pattern that refer to

human females, sex-gender pairs, feminine participles when used as nouns, nearly all nouns that

end in -u, and several other nouns with certain root patterns. All of these sound plurals can be

explained through simple concatenation without the need for a templatic representation.

The broken plural system in Moroccan Arabic cannot be explained through traditional

concatenative morphology. However, certain facts about Moroccan Arabic indicate that it

cannot match up exactly with the autosegmental analysis of standard Arabic broken plurals

discussed above. Moroccan Arabic is quite different from standard Arabic in its vowel system.

Whereas standard Arabic contrasts the short and long vowels /a/, /i/, and /u/, Moroccan Arabic

has lost many of its short vowels largely due to the influence from Berber and has more

consonant clusters than allowed under the constraints of phonology in standard Arabic.

Moroccan Arabic does, however, have a distinction between stable vowels (/i/, /a/, and /u/) and

unstable vowels (/!/, /o/, and /e/) (Harrell 2004: 10-11). Consequently, a prosodic morphology

approach to the formation of the broken plural in Moroccan Arabic operates differently from that

of standard Arabic. Ratcliffe notes that the distribution of allomorphs in [Moroccan Arabic]

has become more diffuse [than in other dialects], even random, rather than tending to concentrate

around a few prominent patterns (2003: 350). Indeed, much of the connection between

singular and plural forms does seem arbitrary.

The pattern that accounts for the largest number of broken plurals in Moroccan Arabic is

the pattern CCaCeC according to Harrell (2004: 113). He notes that this form is found primarily

with four-consonant singular forms although it does correspond to other singular forms as well.


13/28

13

In this pattern, if a singular form has four consonants, then they seem to associate one-to-one

with the CCaCeC pattern, as in (15).


a. fendeq fnadeq hotelb. melyun mlayen millionc. serwal srawel pair of trousersd. konna knane notebooke. ellaba laleb kind of garment

This might be explained by the following synchronous analysis, as with (15a)fendeqhotel,

pluralfnadeq.

(16)

However, when the broken plural form CCaCeC occurs with singular forms of fewer than four

consonants, it is evident that there are other processes underlying the change from singular to

plural. The data in (17) show the insertion of a glide /w/ or /y/, depending at times on the first

vowel in the singular form, into one of the consonant slots of the template CCaCeC.

(17) Singular Plural Glossa. xa.tem xwatem ring

a.me# wame# mosque

b. gi.t"un gyat"en tentni.an nyaen target

c. bzim bzayem belt-buckleflu.ka flayek boat

d. seb.ba sbayeb reasona.ri.ma rayem crime

C V C C V C

f n d q

e

template

vocal melody

consonants

C C V C V C

f n d q

a e

!


14/28

14

e. ri."a rwaye" odori.ha wayeh side, direction

The template CCaCeC requires consonants to fill in each of its consonant slots, similar to the

obligatory consonants seen in standard Arabic iambic consonant forms. However, some of the

constraints on Moroccan Arabic are different. It is the first syllable, and not the first two moras,

that attach themselves to a broken plural template first. This will be demonstrated in later

examples. It also appears that a word-final consonant is still extrametrical in Moroccan Arabic.

Based on these two criteria, the following transformations from singular to plural seem likely in

a three-consonant singular form like (17a)xatem.

(18)

First, it appears that the consonant from the first syllable of the singular form attaches to the first

consonant of the root, as shown in (18). The dash between the first part (CCV-) and second part

(-CVC) of the above template indicates a distinction similar to the difference between the iambic

portion of many standard Arabic broken plurals (CVCVV-) and the final, non-iambic portion of

the template (realized in several ways in standard Arabic). Broken plurals beginning with CCV-

comprise the six largest groups of different broken plural templates in the Moroccan dialect (and

also at least two other less frequent broken plurals). It appears that after the consonants of the

first syllable are attached to the template, the final -CVC portion becomes linked to the final

consonants ofxatem, yielding the structure in (19).

C C V - C V C

a e

x

vocal melody

template

consonants


15/28

15

(19)

It appears that the empty consonant slot shown in (19) requires an obligatory consonant, just as

the forms seen in standard Arabic. As a rule, this consonant slot is filled by the glide /w/

(however, as will be seen in later examples, the glide /y/ may also occupy this type of consonant

slot). The result is shown in (20).

(20)

The ultimate result is the plural formxwatem. The same formation accounts for plural singular

pairs likeame!mosque, pluralwame!in (17a), git"untent, plural gyat"enin (17b), and nian

target, plural nyaenin (17b). However, in these last two forms, the glide that is attached to the

unlinked consonant is a /y/ rather than a /w/. Harrell (2004) points out that the glide /y/ typically

occurs in the plural form when the vowel in the singular form is /i/, and /w/ occurs elsewhere.

Speaking in prosodic terms, it is unclear when this change would take place.

In (21), the plural formations are illustrated for each form (b)-(e) of the other words listed

in (17).

C C V - C V C

a e

x t m

w

vocal melody

template

underlyingconsonants

obligatoryconsonants

C C V - C V C

a e

x t m

vocal melody

template

consonants


16/28

16

(21)

SingularFirst !association Second !association (Glide insertion)

gi.tun

(!1=gi)

bzi

(!1=bzi)

seb.ba

(!1=seb)

ri.h"a

(!1=ri)

The processes in (21) demonstrate that the consonants from the first syllable in the singular form

attach to the template first. It is evident that it is the first syllable, and not the first mora, that is

crucial in this initial mapping as illustrated by the word seb.ba. If only the first mora (se) were

to apply to the initial (CCV-) portion of the template, then the other two consonants ( b-b) would

not be able to associate until the second portion (-CVC). The obligatory consonant (the glidey,

in this case), would then fill the second consonant slot, giving ungrammatical *syabeb.

C C V - C V C

a e

g

C C V - C V C

a e

g t n

C C V - C V C

a e

g y t n

C C V - C V C

a e

b z

a e

b z m

C C V - C V C C C V - C V C

a e

b z y m

C C V - C V C

a e

s b

a e

s b b


a e

s b y b

C C V - C V C

a e

r

a e

r h


a e

r w y h


17/28

17

This left-to-right association of the consonants to the first portion of the template (i.e.,

CCV-) is typical of Arabic according to McCarthy & Prince (1990). However, it appears that the

rest of the consonants (those not occurring in the first syllable of the word) get associated to the

end of the template from right to left. In other words, association happens from the edges of the

template towards the middle. Notice that extrametrical consonants, such as the m in bzi, do

not apply with the rest of the consonants of the initial syllable (which is reminiscent of their

application in standard Arabic). Perhaps it is possible that this apparent bi-directional

association occurs because it occurs on two separate levels, the first of which involves the initial

syllable of the singular form and associates with the CCV- portion of the template (through

principles of autosegmental phonology), and the second which involves the remaining

consonants. The final example in (21) is an interesting case. It is a rare example where two

consonantal slots must be filled by obligatory consonants. In these cases, the template is filled in

with two different glides, [w] and [y]. The ordering (or direction) of this association is not clear.

If it follows from the right-to-left association of hto the final consonant of the template, then it

seems thatyis associated first, followed by w. However, if the glide association happens at an

entirely different level, it may utilize the more typical left-to-right association pattern of Arabic

and associateyto the template, followed by w. It is unclear why the plural form of rih"ain (17e)

is rwayeh", with the glide wpreceding the glidey. Since there are two slots to fill, it may be that

the predictedy(following from the vowel iin the singular form) fills the second slot first,

moving from the right edge (after filling in the final h") to the left. Then, the only other default

glide wwould fill in the first slot.

The second most common broken plural in Moroccan Arabic is CCaC, followed by

CCaCi, CCuC, CCuCa, and CCaCa; the form which is the eleventh-most common is CCeC


18/28

18

(Harrell 2004: 113-125). All of these forms, which may be simplified to the common form

CCVC(V), are created through similar processes as the form CCaCeC shown above. However,

unlike the iambic broken plural forms found in standard Arabic, the choice of these forms based

on the phonological form of the singular does not seem to be predictable. They are all

allomorphs which are lexically determined. It is possible that the historical changes that took

place when Moroccan Arabic was forming from standard Arabic influenced its broken plural

forms and that this influence is now imperceptible; however, there seems to be little motivation

for much of the assignment of singular forms to broken plural forms in Moroccan Arabic, as will

be seen in the discussion of the rest of the CCVC(V) forms.

The CCaC broken plural form tends to occur with singular forms CVCC, CCVC, or

CVCCV (Harell 2004: 117-118). It is interesting to observe that the related broken plural form

CCaCi is not the form which occurs with the above singular form ending in a vowel (namely,

singular nouns of form CVCCV). This indicates that the form of the plural is not predictable

from the form of the singular. Interestingly, this is in stark contrast to iambic broken plural

forms in standard Arabic where the form of the singular predicts the (post-iamb) form of the

plural, for example sult!aan~ salaat!iinbutjundub~janaadib. In standard Arabic, the vowel

length of the final syllable in the singular form predicts the vowel length of the final syllable in

the plural form. In (22), some of the Moroccan Arabic CCaC plural forms are given.


a. bent bnat girl, daughtermoxx mxax brain

b. qdim qdam old (of things, not people)mhed mhad cradle


19/28

19

c. sen.na snan tooth

g$or.za g%raz viper

The above data support the analysis that it is the consonants from the first syllable of the singular

form that are applied to the CCV- portion of the CCV-C template. In bent, the initial syllable is

ben (where tis extrametrical). Hence, b-n-is applied to the CCV- template, yielding bna-, in

this case. Next, the final consonant -tis able to associate with the final -C slot of the CCVC

template, giving bnat. In singular CCVC forms, like qdim, similar changes occur. The first

syllable (without the extrametrical ) is qdi, which applies to the CCV- plural template to

yield qda-. Then, the final consonant massociates with the final consonant of the plural

template, giving qdam. The CVCCV singular forms (such as senna) also behave similarly.

There are also a few two-consonant singular forms that have broken plurals of the form

CCaC.


a. bir byar wellb. rih" ryah" wind

c. duh" dwah" cradle

d. hul hwal worrye. na.ga nyag female camelf. xal xwal maternal uncleg. tub tyab cloth

It is evident that these two-consonant words behave similarly when applied to the CCa-C plural

form. The non-extrametrical portion of the first syllable applies to the CCa- template, and the

remaining consonant applies to the -C portion of the template. Then, a glide is associated to the

remaining C-slot. As before, an iin the singular indicates that the glideywill occur as the

obligatory consonant in the plural (as in (23a) bir~ byar). Similarly, a woccurs in the plural


20/28

20

when the similar vowel uoccurs in the singular. However, Harrell (2004: 118) points out that

the choice of glide seems arbitrary when the vowel in the singular is an a (as in (23e) naga~

nyag, but (23f)xal~xwal) and that there is one noun that does not conform to this pattern (as in

(23g) tub~ tyab), where the medial udoes not imply a win the plural form. There is no apparent

explanation for this anomaly.

The majority of singular forms associated with the broken plural form CCaCi are the

forms CeCCa and CoCCa (Harrell 2004: 118). These are very similar to the forms in (22)

discussed above.


a. qeb.d"a qbad"i handle

b. noq.t"a nqat"i point

However, there are also some other singular forms associated with this broken plural, as in (25).


a. dlu dlawi bucketb. da.lya dwali vinec. sa.qya swaqi irrigation ditch; canald. tlu.ya tlawi turning, twiste. ka.ya kawi complaint

f. t"a.gi.ya t"wagi skullcapg. xa.mi.ya xwami curtain (in doorway)

In the short word in (25a) dlubucket, the first syllable consonants, dl-, associate to the first two

consonants of the CCaCi pattern. The glide wthen fills in the third consonant slot, which is

predicted from the vowel uin the singular form. However, the rest of the words (25b-g)

demonstrate an odd change from singular to plural, and theyfound in the end of the singular is

never attached to the plural template. Harrell posits that in words like (25e) kaya~ kawi, the


21/28

21

glideyin the singular form is replaced by a win the plural form (2004: 119). However, in

standard Arabic, both the singular and the plural forms use a w(akw-at, plural akawaat)9,

although there are alternate forms of words meaning complaint which have ayin them (such as

ikaaya). In addition, the root for this form is -k-a, which is a weak root, so it is not strange that

a variable glide would surface.10 The pattern found with ikaaya (namely, CiCaaya) in standard

Arabic has a certain meaning (the thing that is complained, or in general, the thing that is

(insert verb)-ed11). It appears that in the shift to Moroccan Arabic, some nouns in the singular

form that have a -yaending have been re-analyzed as a group to form the broken plural from

with template CwaCi. This sheds some light on the seemingly strange alternations above it

appears that the plural form may have deviated from the original yof the singular form to the w

found in the plural of some words (likeakawaat) in Arabic. It appears that the -yaassociated

with the singular form has been analyzed by speakers as a type of suffix. Apart from the glide

variation, the words behave normally in its broken plural formation.

Harrell notes that the fourth- and fifth-most common forms CCuC and CCuCa are closely

related (2004: 120-121). For instance, some singular forms have plurals from both forms,

depending on the speaker: dikrooster, plural dyukor dyuka. The following are some examples

of plurals of the patterns CCuC and CCuCa.

(26) Singular Plural Glossa. xedd xdud cheek

qla# qlu# (boat) sail

sfina sfun ship

9The standard Arabic data given here are taken from Wehr (1994).10When a three-letter root has a vowel (a, i, or u) as part of its root, it is called a weak root. The vowel is subject tochange in many instances, such as in conjugation in the imperfect verb forms, where it changes to a uin this case.Words with weak roots also show many alternations with glides in other forms, as demonstrated with nouns likeakw-atand ikaaya.11According to correspondence with a fluent speaker of standard Arabic.


22/28

22

b. bit byut room

r"as" r"yus" head

c. bt"en bt"una belly

derb druba (dead-end) street

moxx mxuxa brainmqes"s" mqus"a scissorsdib dyuba wolf, jackal

In (26), it is easy to see how the singulars of pattern CVCC, CCVC, and CCVCV attach to a

CCuC plural form. Words like bitroom, plural byutin (26b) demonstrate another instance

where a glide is associated to the obligatory consonant slot of the plural template. In addition,

the plural forms of the singulars that typically map to the CCuCa template are easily predicted.

An interesting case is mqes"s"in (26c), which has a geminate s". Since there are not enough slots in

the template CCuCa for all four segments12, the final geminated s"only gets associated to one

consonant slot.

(27)

It appears that the final s"is left unassociated. There is an alternate analysis that might work well

in explaining this case (though not cases in which properties of the singular form are overtly

carried over to the broken plural form) the root might be mapped to the template, rather than

the singular form. If this were the case, then the absence of the geminate s"would be predictable.

McCarthy (1979, 1981, 1986) notes that through looking at gemination in Arabic roots, it seems

12Note that there are four-consonant roots, such as those described in (15) likefendeq, root /fndq/. Four-consonantroot words often take the most common of the Moroccan Arabic broken plurals, CCaCeC.

u a

m q s" s"

C C V - C V


23/28

23

likely that they are subject to the OCP (Obligatory Contour Principle) 13and thus that segments

may not be duplicated in the underlying representation. This would indicate that before the root

is associated with a template (particularly in the paradigms mentioned in Section 2 above), there

are no duplicate segments at the underlying representation. This analysis posits that at the

underlying representation of the singular form, the consonant s"gets spread rightward to fill both

consonant slots. However, this gemination obviously does not transfer to the plural. Even

though the analysis of a root-to-template mapping might make more sense in explaining the

absence of geminates in plural forms such as mqus"a, it would not explain the formation of mxuxa

brain (pl) from its singular form, moxx. Here, the apparent gemination ofxis retained in the

plural form. It is therefore more likely that the lack of gemination in mqus"ais due to the lack of

consonant slots on the broken plural template.

Another interesting aspect of the word moxxis that it has two plural forms, both mxuxa

(shown in (26b)) and mxax (shown in (22)). The fact that the same word forms two different

plural forms is noteworthy because it demonstrates the rather arbitrary relationship between

many singular forms in Moroccan Arabic and their broken plural counterparts. In addition,

Harrell (2004: 101) points out that a single singular form may have multiple plural forms with

different meanings.

(28) Singular Plural Glossa. xeddam xeddam-in working (noun)

b. xeddam xeddam-a workerc. xeddam xdadem units of agricultural land measurement

13See Leben (1973).


24/28

24

The first two forms in (28) exhibit sound plural endings that are fairly predictable: the participle

xeddamworking takes the suffix -in, and the noun indicating a professional activityxeddam

worker takes the suffix -a. However,xeddamunits of agricultural land measurement does not

fall into a typical sound plural category; instead, it is applied to a typical CCaCeC broken plural

pattern.

The sixth-most common broken plural pattern, CCaCa, appears to occur almost

exclusively with singular patterns CeCCi or CoCCi, although it also occurs with singular forms

containing only two consonants.

(29) Singular Plural Glossa. fer.di frada pistol

kor.si krasa stool

h"ew.li h"wala sheep

b. bu.i bwaa spark plugta.li twala last

h"i.zi h"yaza (wall) tapestry

As usual, if the vowel following the first consonant in the singular form is i, the glide in the

plural form isy; otherwise, the glide is always w, in this case.

There are other broken plural forms beginning with CCV-, but they are not nearly as

common and will not be discussed at great length here. Their plural forms show typical

phenomena regarding insertion of glides due to obligatory consonants. Below are the patterns

CCeC and CCaCCa.


a. bu.t"a bwet" cask, barrel

ga.#a gye# threshing-floor

qol.la qlel jug


25/28

25

b. bu.a.di bwadi noviceku.di kwada carriage

mg%er".bi mg%ar"ba Moroccanma.lak mlayka angel

There is one exception in (30) to the rule of application of the first syllable to the CCV- template.

The word malakactually applies the first two consonants, mand l, which belong to two separate

syllables, to the CCV- template so that the glide is attached to the third consonant: CCa CCa,

mlayka. In addition, it is interesting that the glide here isyand not w as in most of the other

forms in (30). It seems that the glide is probably again unpredictable in the absence of an i or a u

in the singular form. It is interesting that the word for angel, which in standard Arabic is

malaak, has not become mlakin Moroccan Arabic. The long vowel aain malaakhas been

reduced to the quasi-long vowel ain the Moroccan Arabic version, but the short vowel ain

malaakhas not been deleted, as is common in Moroccan Arabic words. It is perhaps for this

reason (the original length of the vowels in malak) that the lremains connected to the CCV-

template. The word malakacts like those words which do demonstrate typical vowel reduction.

5. Conclusion

The above examples have demonstrated that the Moroccan broken plurals beginning with the

stem CCV- behave similarly to the standard Arabic broken plurals beginning with iambic

CVCVV- discussed in McCarthy & Prince (1990). However, there are differences between

Moroccan Arabic and standard Arabic broken plural formation in these types of broken plurals.

For instance, instead of the initial bimoraic mapping to the CVCVV- template demonstrated in

standard Arabic, Moroccan Arabic plurals have been shown to be formed through mapping the

consonants of the first syllable to the CCV- template. It has also been shown that the obligatory

consonant position filled by the glide [w] in standard Arabic is filled by one of two glides, [w]


26/28

26

and [y], in standard Arabic. The glide ([w] or [y]) which occurs in Moroccan Arabic is often

predictable based on the properties of the first syllable in Moroccan Arabic singular forms in

contrast to the prediction of glide position in standard Arabic forms based on the first two moras

of the singular form.

In addition, it has been shown that the correlation between singular and plural forms is far

from systematic in Moroccan Arabic, although there are certain singular patterns that tend to

occur with certain broken plural patterns. This is particularly interesting because some words

occur with multiple broken plural patterns (and in some cases, the multiple plurals occurring do

not seem very related, as with moxxbrain, plural mxaxor mxuxa). Speakers of Moroccan

Arabic are able to abstract something away from the singular form in order to apply it to a

broken plural format, and there are so many combinations of singular and plural patterns that it

appears this may be done in many ways. In addition, the occurrence in Moroccan Arabic of both

sound plurals, which demonstrate typical concatenative morphological processes, and broken

plurals, which clearly do not, shows that speakers are able to use both sorts of processes in order

add the inflectional linguistic unit (plural).

Both Moroccan Arabic and standard Arabic seem to show similar morphological

processes in the formation of the broken plural. The root-and-template approach which works so

well in describing many of the morphological processes in the verb conjugations of Semitic

languages like Arabic has been shown inadequate in explaining the systematic copying of

features from the singular form to the plural form in broken plural formation. It is the singular

form, which observably contains the segments from the root in addition to other idiosyncratic

segments, which helps dictate some of the properties of the broken plural. Moroccan Arabic is

interesting in particular because it shows that some of the features from standard Arabic (such as


27/28

27

using syllable structure to dictate place of segments such as glides in the plural forms) still apply

when the syllable structure of the language is entirely different (mostly due to the influence of

Berber on the language). The Moroccan dialect has obviously changed over time, resulting in a

language that sounds quite different from standard Arabic yet shares similar morphological

processes.


28/28

References

Brame, M. (1970). Arabic Phonology: Implications for Phonological Theory and HistoricalSemitic. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

Harrell, R. S. (2004). A Short Reference Grammar of Moroccan Arabic. Washington, D.C.,Georgetown University Press.

Katamba, F. (1993). Prosodic Morphology. Morphology. New York, N.Y., St. Martin's Press:163-177.

Leben, W. (1973). Suprasegmental phonology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Ph.D. dissertation.

McCarthy, J. (1979). Formal Problems in Semitic Phonology and Morphology. Cambridge,Mass.: MIT Ph.D. dissertation. [Distributed by Indiana University Linguistics Club.].

McCarthy, J. (1981). "A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology." Linguistic Inquiry12: 373418.

McCarthy, J. (1986). "OCP Effects: Gemination and Antigemination." Linguistic Inquiry 17:207-263.

McCarthy, J. P., Alan. (1990). "Foot and Word in Prosodic Morphology: The Arabic BrokenPlural." Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 8: 209-282.

Ratcliffe, R. R. (1998). The 'Broken' Plural Problem in Arabic and Comparative Semitic:Allomorphy and Analogy in Non-concatenative Morphology. Amsterdam/Philadelphia,John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Ratcliffe, R. R. (2003). The Historical Dynamics of the Arabic Plural System: Implications forthe Theory of Morphology. Research in Afroasiatic Grammar II. J. Lecarme. Amsterdam,John Benjamins Publishing Company: 339-362.

Wehr, H. (1994). A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic. Ed. by J. Milton Cowan. Wiesbaden,Harrassowitz.

melissa troyer - broken plural formation in moroccan arabic

Documents