Fractional Proportional Partitives (FPP) : Focus on the Variation in “One in Three” Partitives and Agreement

Al Siyabi, Iman Khalfan and Camilleri, Maris and Tamm, Anne (2023) Fractional Proportional Partitives (FPP) : Focus on the Variation in “One in Three” Partitives and Agreement. In: European Partitives in Comparison. Károli Könyvek. Tanulmánykötet . L'Harmattan Kiadó; Károli Gáspár Református Egyetem, Budapest, pp. 151-189. ISBN 9782336472256; 9782336472263

Preview

Text 153_PDFsam_EuropeanPartitivesinComparison_OA_DOI.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

This exploratory paper presents a new and understudied type of partitives, the “Cardinal Numeral 1 Preposition/Case Cardinal Numeral 2” partitive structures (e.g., “one in three”, “egy (a) háromból / háromból egy” in Hungarian). It proposes the term fractional proportional partitives (FPP) and examines variation in types (from, in, of) and subject agreement. That is, whether “one in N2” triggers only grammatical agreement, such as one in N is, or allows also for semantic agreement, such as one in N are. The data are primarily from varieties of Arabic. The Arabic dual agreement, “two of N2”, is also presented. Two pilot surveys and an elicitation-based study clarify the nature of FPPs, whereby Maltese, Standard, Gulf and Tunisian Arabic are the focus. Forays are made into other unrelated and geographically distant languages of the world. The first survey establishes that there is variation in the subject–verb agreement within FPPs among Arabic speakers of different varieties and Arabic speakers of English. A supplementary elicitation study of Hungarian, Khmer, and Burmese serves to establish the typological variation in the “from” (separative), “in” (locative), and “of” (possessive) types in FPPs. The second survey adds more typological diversity to the database, whereby it becomes clear that while the possessive “of” strategy is not used for FPPs with this method, the separative “from” strategy is predominant. The locative strategy can further be divided into a container “in” strategy and a surface “on” strategy. Genealogically and areally distant languages may employ similar FPP strategies. Any sort of correlation between the strategies and agreement types did not emerge clearly in the dataset, thus the causes for agreement patterns could be sought elsewhere. The study additionally reflects upon several methodological considerations, particularly the use of typological questionnaires and elicitation in the study of FPPs and agreement.

Actions (login required)

Edit Item