ABSTRACT

Arabic negative clauses are characterized by a deep structure NEG - a presentential element that is treated as a node-label and realized in terms of various lexical items later in the derivation (1). The presence of NEG is motivated not only by the fact that it serves to dominate negative lexical items, but also by the function it fulfils in deep structure constraints. The occurrence of negative items such as wa La: lJatta: (not even), as well as a number of similar idiomatic phrases which include qaida sacrah, qaida ?unmulah, etc. (a hair's breadth, one iota, etc.) all seem to motivate the postulation of a deep structure presentential NEG. Here are a few examples:

1-lam yarsub ·?al]adun wa la: ~atta: ramzi did not fail one and not even Ramzi (Nobody failed, not even Ramzi)

2-* rasaba bacqubum wa la: I}atta: ramzi: failed some them and not even Ramzi

3-Ian natara:jaca qaida sacrah will not we retreat a breadth a hair (We will not retreat a hair's breadth)

4-? sanatara:jacu qida sacrah will we retreat a hair's breadth

5-Ian natara:jaca qaida ?unmulah will not we retreat an inch (We will not retreat an inch)

6-? sanatara:jacu qaida ?unmulah will we retreat an inch

Sentence 2 is excluded from the language on the grounds that the phrase wa La: /Jatta: (not even) may occur only in sentences preceded by a negative item such as lam (did not) which appears in the well-formed sentence 1. Examples 3-4 also suggest that the occurrence of the idiomatic phrases qaida Sacrah and qaida ?unmulah (a hair's breadth and an inch respectively) is conditioned by the sentence being negative. This explains why 4 and 6 are doubtful sentences - probably unacceptable - and at the same time, explains the grammaticality of their counterparts 3 and 5.