Catherine Taine-Cheikh
email: cath.tainecheikh@gmail.com

Catherine Taine

Keywords: Arabic, embedded clause, co-reference, auxiliary, serial verb

From embedded propositions to complex predicates. The contribution of Arabic dialects to syntactic typology

Introduction

Embedded sentences are perhaps one of the least studied areas of Arabic dialectology. However, some common phenomena in Arabic have attracted the attention of typological linguists, such as the existence of finite verb completives without subordinators, and serial verbs. By finite verb, we mean in particular that -apart from pidgin-creoles-the main aspectuotemporal forms of the Arabic verb include a personal index that represents the subject of the proposition. This personal index is essentially formed by a prefix in the imperfective and a suffix in the perfective. Most syntactic descriptions of Arabic devote a few chapters to phrasal dependency, and some such as [START_REF] Feghali | Syntaxe des parlers arabes actuels du Liban[END_REF], [START_REF] Woidich | Das Kairenisch-Arabische. Eine Grammatik[END_REF], [START_REF] Holes | Dialect, Culture and Society in Eastern Arabia[END_REF] and [START_REF] Leung | Emirati Arabic: A Comprehensive Grammar[END_REF] provide fairly in-depth studies of several types of embedded sentences. Other studies shed light on specific issues such as syndetic vs. asyndetic hypotaxis [START_REF] Bloch | Die Hypotaxe im Damaszenisch-Arabischen, mit Vergleichen zur Hypotaxe im Klassisch-Arabischen[END_REF], subordination vs. juxtaposition [START_REF] Fischer | Unterordnende und nebenordnende Verbalkomposita in den neuarabischen Dialekten und im Schriftarabischen[END_REF], and serial verbs [START_REF] Woidich | Verbalphrasen mit asyndetischem Perfekt im Ägyptisch-Arabischen[END_REF][START_REF] Versteegh | Some remarks on verbal serialization in Arabic dialects[END_REF][START_REF] Versteegh | Serial verbs[END_REF]. However, it remains difficult to obtain a precise idea of the convergences and divergences between the different dialects. The aim here is not, of course, to fill in all the gaps, but to address a number of questions that seem to arise in a similar way in much of the Arabic domain. I propose to tackle them by taking the Arabic dialect Ḥassāniyya (spoken in West-Saharan Africa, and in particular in Mauritania) as a thread, and by relying on articles I have published since 2000 on some of the points addressed here. It will be seen that there is some continuity between embedded sentences with and without subordinators on the one hand, and embedded sentences without subordinators and complex predicates on the other, insofar as finite verb forms are regularly found in V 2 position of as well as in V 1 -unlike in many languages where V 2 takes a non-finite (or infinitive) form. My paper is divided into two parts following this introductory section. In part 2, I study dependent sentences with subordinators, distinguishing the different types of embedded sentences, largely recognizable by the subordinator(s) used, even if some of them are used for several types of dependent clauses. In part 3, I analyse the types of embedded sentences without subordinators, first with distinct subjects, then with identical subjects, and compare these to the different types of complex predicates where one of the two verbs loses its syntactic autonomy and undergoes more or less radical constraints and/or modifications. By focusing on embedded clauses within complex sentences, I exclude a priori circumstantial clauses as well as coordinated clauses (even if some particular cases will have to be discussed) 1 in order to favor a particular type of phrasal dependence for which the completives appear to serve as the prototypical model. Creissels (2006: II, 192) defines them as follows: "Combined with a word from the matrix sentence, the complements form a construction in which the subordinate 'completes' the word with which it is combined, i.e. it saturates the valence of this word as a complement in the form of a nominal or adpositional constituent would". Complementary clauses correspond, most often, to object complements (direct or indirect) and regularly appear after transitive verbs (direct or not). After intransitive verbs, completives are normally excluded, but there are some (final or consequential) clauses that share important similarities with them, both in terms of phrasal dependency and syntactic complexity. Remark 1: To make the examples easier to understand, the verb (or nominal predicate) on which the embedded proposition depends is in bold and the subordinator is underlined. Remark 2: Concerning the examples in Ḥassāniyya (mostly borrowed from published literature), the transcription has been homogenised and some examples have been shortened. I am responsible, for the majority of the examples, for the shortening, the juxtapositional analysis as well as for the translation (except where the original documents were written in English).

Embedded clauses with a subordinator

In addition to the two types of subordinate clauses mentioned above, namely complementary and final/consecutive clauses, it is also appropriate to add indirect interrogative clauses. I will thus distinguish three types of embedded clauses. The type of clause depends partly on the semantics of the predicate of the matrix sentence. In the corpora studied, completives are regularly dependent on a verb, which helps to distinguish them clearly from relative propositions. In spite of this, we will see that subordinator 'transfers' have not only occurred between the three main categories, but also, in some Arabic dialects, with relators.

Complementation

In Classical Arabic, several factors determine the occurrence and choice of a subordinator. While verbal semantics has a determining influence on the choice between syndetic vs. asyndetic constructions, the choice between ˀan and ˀanna is determined by whether the fact expressed in the completive is actual/realized or not [START_REF] Fischer | Dass'-sätze mit ˀan und ˀanna[END_REF]. This does not seem to be the case in dialects. In her thesis, Lentin (1997: 374-416) shows the extent of variation in Middle Arabic writings -variation certainly due, at least in part, to dialectal influence. I will not go into detail here on the case of Classical Arabic. The embedding of completives in Arabic dialects often involves a subordinator. The subordinator may be specific to certain varieties and/or occur only after certain verbs, but the most frequent subordinator is one of the variants of cl. ˀan and ˀannaunless it is an inheritance from the old ˀinna.

än(n)/in(n) in Ḥassāniyya

In Ḥassāniyya, the transcription of the subordinator changes but never contains a laryngeal. The vowel /a/ or /ə/ depends on the author -thus än(n) or ən(n) in my transcription. 2 This completive is compatible with verbs (or expressions) of saying, thinking, knowing, appreciating, estimating and even asking, but we will see in 2.1.2 that the most usual subordinator for these is ˤan.

(1) u šäkku ən-hum lâhi yađ̣ ə lmû-ni and think.PFV.3PL COMP-PR.3PL FUT commit_an_abuse.IPFV.3PL-PR.1SG '[...] and they thought they could deceive me' (Tauzin 1993: 38) The pronoun -hum cannot be omitted in (3). When suffixed to ən, it is in co-reference with the personal index of both verbs, in the main clause and in the completive. However, if the two verbs do not have the same subject, co-reference is made to the subject of the completive, as the following two examples show:

(2) in sheaths[of]-PR.3PL 'Know that the men are in their sheaths' (Tauzin1993: 26) A noun can be introduced in verbal predicate clauses. This is the case in (7) where the topicalized nominal lə-gnāvîd is referenced by the object clitic. It can be seen that the pronoun -u suffixed to en(n) remains co-referential with the personal index of the verb of the completive (here, it is also co-referential with the personal index of the main verb). (Tauzin1993: 88) The presence of the complementizer (or quotative) is particularly frequent after the verb 'to say ', but example (3) shows that an asyndetic construction is also possible. Furthermore, it is not uncommon for än/ən to be specified by a preposition (ˤlä 'on' or bə 'with') after gâl 'to say', hence the presence of the locutions ˤlän/ˤlən and bän/bən in: (8) [START_REF] Heath | Hassaniya Arabic (Mali): Poetic and Ethnographic Texts[END_REF]:106) In the last example, it can be seen that bənn is repeated in the form ən, with the pronoun suffixed to ən taking the feminine gender of tqašmiyya (one would find the masculine -u if vsäyyid 'idiocy' replaced tqašmiyya). Doubling is frequent in the presence of a topicalized phrase, and is quasi necessary when the expression of the new item is a bit long, as here. A complementizer can be found after request verbs, as in ( 10), but this is an unusual case and ənn-ək could be omitted without any change in meaning. ( 10 (Tauzin1993: 28) Apart from example (3) where the verb of the complementive clause (gâl) is in the perfective form, the verbs are all in the imperfective form -with or without a future tense morpheme. It should be noted that, unlike many other Arabic varieties, Ḥassāniyya does not mark a difference between the modal imperfective (the subjunctive) and the indicative imperfective.

ˀän(n)/ˀin(n) and their variants in other languages

While Beaussier's dictionary (1958: 20) provides the forms ˀan and ˀanna-'that, so that' with a vowel a, Marçais (1977: 232) considers that ən(n), sometimes ənna, is in use in isolated form only in the Bedouin languages of the Maghreb. 3 The absence of this complementizer in the dictionaries of Moroccan Arabic (Colin 1993(Colin -1997) ) and South Tunisian Marazig [START_REF] Boris | Lexique du parler arabe des Marazig[END_REF] confirms its very limited use, apart from expressions borrowed from classical Arabic (Heath 2002: 493-4, Marçais andGuiga 1958-61: 154). However, examples can be found in more recent studies -for example, Ritt-Benmimoun (2014: 193) gives two examples (in the form ann-, with suffix) for the Bedouin dialect of the Douz region and Pereira (2010: 192) provides several examples (in the form ˀənna or ˀənn-) for the Libyan dialect of Tripoli-, without this complementizer ever being given as the only one in use, or even the main equivalent of 'that' (see under 2.1.3). In Eastern languages, however, the vocalization in i/ə seems to be widespread and goes hand in hand with the affirmation of the non-obligatory use of the complementizer in many languages. In the case of Eastern Arabia as described by Holes, the optional character of in(n) is qualified by the semantics of the verb and the nature of the predicate of the completive clause:

It is not possible to give any hard statistics as to the proportion of sentences in the data base which had the complementiser in(n) compared with those which did not have it in cases where they could have done, but at a rough estimate there must have been 40 to 50 examples without a complementiser to every one with. I give here some typical examples where in(n) did occur. A number of factors may possibly have been influential in this choice of structure. First, semantics: verbs of saying, thinking and knowing, including speech-acts like consenting and swearing account for most of the examples; by contrast, modal verbs/expressions, and verbs expressing wants, wishes, hopes, fears, which are close in their semantic values to modal verbs, hardly ever occurred with a complementiser. An additional factor favouring a complementiser may be syntactic: equational noun clauses [...]-seemed to favour the use of in(n). (Holes 2016: 375-6).

A (Holes 2016: 377) The morphosyntax of the pronoun however varies more in Eastern languages than in Ḥassāniyya. Indeed, the suffix pronoun is in coreference with the personal index of the verb in an example very similar to (14) (so in-hum instead inn-ah). It is even absent in another example. 4Regarding Cairo Arabic, where both constructions -asyndetic or syndetic with inn-are attested for the completive, Woidich (2006: 391) points out the factors that make the use of the complementizer mandatory: the presence of a preposition such as ˤala in (15) and the fact that the embedded proposition is the subject of the main predicate as in (16). 'he informed me that I had won the case' (Woidich 2006: 391) On the other hand, Bloch (1965:49-50) considers that the distinction between the declarative (konstatierend-) and the modal (qualifizierend-), is made in Damascus by the use of the prefix b-in front of forms in y-, and not by the use of the complementizer. Giving examples for Jerusalem borrowed from Piamenta (1965: 12) 'I knew I would find you' (Bloch 1965: 50) In contrast to this tendency to delete inn (to which I will return in section 3.2.1), there is a tendency in Lebanese Arabic to generalize ˀənno as a discourse tag [START_REF] Germanos | From complementizer to discourse marker. The functions of ˀənno in Lebanese Arabic[END_REF]. When used as a complementizer, its presence is only obligatory in certain cases (comparable to Cairo Arabic), but it is notable that the form ˀənno has become frozen, with the suffix o in PR.3M.SG nonetheless present.6

Other complementizers

In Ḥassāniyya, the most frequent complementizer is ˤan(n). Its behaviour with the suffix pronoun is identical to both the subordinator ən(n) and the preposition ˤan. The prepositional ˤan is an ablative that expresses detachment, remoteness, provenance and is constructed, not only with a suffix, but also with a nominal -an infrequent feature that Ḥassāniyya shares with only a few southern Maghrebi varieties (Procházka 1993: 71). The ˤan of subjunction is used throughout the Ḥassāniyya area and is given as the usual complementizer both by Cohen (1963: 225) for Gebla (in southwestern Mauritania) and by Heath (2004: 324) for Azawad (in Mali). According to the latter, ˤan < ənn (by mutation), but it can also be considered an extension of the uses of the preposition ˤan, especially following the pseudo-verb ˤand-PR, which, followed by ˤan, takes on the meaning of 'to think'. See example (21), to be compared with ( 22 (Cohen 1963: 225) However, the mutation ˀ > ˤ (the ˀanˀana) is not improbable, especially since some speakers in eastern Mauritania (Bassiknou region) tend to add a pharyngeal at the beginning of a word, especially before an a. Such a mutation has moreover been evoked (Holes 2016: 377 'This calamity, it isn't known whether it will start at night or in the day time' (Holes 2016: 377) Holes furthermore specifies the conjunctive locution ˤan lā 'so that not' from Bahraini Arabic: "an alternative explanation could be that it is a combination of the preposition ˤan, which often has the sense of 'avoiding ' and lā" (2016: 376 The semantics of the verb sheds light on the presence of lā (and indirectly that of ˤan).7 Indeed, this particular use of lā is associated with verbs of fear or prohibition after which lā is no longer a negation particle. It corresponds to what Forest (1993: 110) describes as a process of restoration of the "empathic continuum", after the so-called apotropaic verbs which create an "emphatic break". This phenomenon, better known as "expletive negation", is attested in many languages of the world (see the ne in French). In Arabic, it concerns mainly -but not only-the negation lā (see Taine-Cheikh 2000: 68-72). In Ḥassāniyya, this lā is hardly used at all except after the idea of fear, whether the verb 'fear' is present as in (25) or implied as in ( 26 'I flee for fear that the house will fall on me.' (Taine-Cheikh 2000: 69) In the Middle East, this lā is attested for instance in Syrian (Cowell 2005: 352). For Cairo, Woidich gives examples with la-, but also with aḥsan or laḥsan (Woidich 2006: 381) 9 and it is rather ta that Feghali (1938: 423) (Feghali 1938: 424) For Feghali, however, this ta -derived from the classical ḥattā 'until'-has many other uses, including expressing a limit in time ('until') and the consequence of an intended or unintended action (I will return to this in section 2.2.1). It can also introduce an optative or volitional complementive clause with a verb in the imperfective alone (without a b particle). Feghali speaks in this case of an "attenuated subjunctive, a kind of future tense with an idea of convenience", as in ( 28) and ( 29), after the pseudo-verb bédd-PR.

( Pereira (2010: 392) for Libyan Arabic present the same type of predicate with emotional content. Brustad (2000: 104-106), who compares the uses of illi as a complementizer in several languages, comes to a similar conclusion and states: "The limited yet strikingly parallel contexts in which /illi/ occurs in Morocco, Egypt, and Syria are worth noting. [...] The 'relativized' /illi/ clause is linked to that emotional state in that it contains the underlying reason or cause of that state." In the Tunisian Arabic of Takroûna, elli introduces completives expressing either the cause or the effect. It also introduces completives expressing the subject or, as in (31), the object [START_REF] Marçais | Esquisse grammaticale de l'arabe maghrébin[END_REF]Guiga 1958-1961: 126-7). ( 31) eˤləm u-ḥoq q elli ha-l-k e lâm ṣâiṛ know.IMP.M.SG and know_well.IMP.M.SG COMP DEM-DEF-speech come_true.PTCP.M.SG 'know and know well that what I say is real'. [START_REF] Marçais | Esquisse grammaticale de l'arabe maghrébin[END_REF]Guiga 1958-1961: 127) bəlli is attested there, but did not replace the conjunctive uses of elli as seems to have happened elsewhere. Indeed bəlli ~ blli (where the preposition bi precedes elli, as in bayn and bin, see note 3) is generally, in the Maghreb, of a much less constrained use than əlli alone. Marçais (1977: 232) describes it as common in urban and rural Algeria. Heath reports frequent attestations in Morocco, alongside bayn and bin, and sometimes bāš. baš (where the preposition bi is also recognized) is not primarily used as a complementizer (see section 2.2.1), but is found in Tunisia after verbs of intention in the speech of the Jews of Tunis (Cohen 1975: 258) and after verbs of request and fear in Takroûna [START_REF] Marçais | Esquisse grammaticale de l'arabe maghrébin[END_REF]Guiga 1958-1961: 215). In Morocco, baš was notably noted by [START_REF] Colin | Notes sur le parler arabe du nord de la région de Taza[END_REF] in the Taza speech:

(32) mā ˤand-ī-š l-ḫabar bāš ˤaṭēt- l-o NEG 1 at-PR.1SG-NEG 2 DEF-new COMP
give.PFV.1SG to-PR.3M.SG 'I don't know that you gave it to him.' (Colin 1920: 84) Without claiming to have surveyed all the complementizers, I will end with the specific case of gále/gāl which is the product of the areal grammaticalization of the verb gále/gāl 'say' used in various Arabic-based pidgins and creoles -notably in the Arabic pidgin-creole of Juba in South Sudan [START_REF] Miller | The grammaticalization of the verbe 'to say' in Juba Arabic[END_REF][START_REF] Miller | Grammaticalisation du verbe gale 'dire' et subordination en Juba Arabic[END_REF]Manfredi 2017: 142-3)-, as well as in the non-creole Sudanese language of the Baggara (Manfredi 2010: 182-3). 10 In the Juba vernacular the use of gále/gāl as a complementizer seems to be very frequent after declarative verbs, especially kelem 'to speak', and is optional after verbs of perception, cognition and action (Miller 2000: 215). While it is excluded after the verb gale, 11 Manfredi gives as possible -and even frequent at the beginning of narrative texts-the sequence gāl gāl among the Baggara. While this raises the question of serial verbs (see section 3.2.3), the grammaticalization of 'say' is more evident in examples like (33) where the two verbs share neither the same personal index nor the same aspectuo-temporal markers (gāl has kept the form of the ACC.M.SG form which is that of the complementizer). ( 33 10 "There are no doubts that gāl introducing sentential argument is due to the African substratum influencing Sudanic Arabic varieties.

Notwithstanding, it is not equally clear if Juba Arabic developed its complementizer gale independently from other Sudanic dialects." (Manfredi 2017: 184).

11 After the verb 'say', the completive is introduced directly (Miller 2000: 215), except in acrolectal varieties where the subordinator ínu borrowed from Sudanese Arabic *innu can be used (Manfredi 2017: 144).

Propositions of purpose and result

It is frequent in Arabic for a same subordinator to introduce a final or a consequence proposition, or even a simple wish proposition. We find here some of the complementizers seen before, especially with verbs of will or intention. Among these subordinators, some are very common accross the Arabic-speaking world, others have a more regional use. I will start with the first ones.

bāš and its variants

The etymology of bāš is bi followed by the interrogative pronoun āš. bāš (or a variant) is widespread in the Arabic dialects of the Maghreb (it is also a common borrowing in the Berber dialects). It introduces subordinates of purpose and consequence, where the verb is regularly in the imperfective. In Ḥassāniyya it can take the form bāš (see ( 34 36)) 12 as well as in Jewish Tripoli (see ( 37)). For Bengasi, Panetta (1943: 319) gives the form bēš/bēs (that has become unusual), and for Maltese Aquilina (1987: 121) 38)), where the subject of the subordinate differs from that of the main clause.

ˤašān and its variants

ˤašān is attested quite widely outside the Maghreb, in various forms ˤašan/ašān/šān/ˤalašān, both as a preposition (especially in the sense of 'for') and to introduce final clauses. As a subordinator, its uses are sometimes extended to express a cause -thus in the Chadian speech of Abbéché (Roth 1979: 201) where the uses of (a)šān/fī šān seem particularly extensive alongside uses in finals or for consequences. 13 In Cairo, ˤašān (alone or followed by xāṭir) is one of the subordinators used for final clauses: (39) b-astaˤiddi ˤašān aˀūm Roth (1979: 201) gives examples of causal subjunction and even an example where ašān introduces a completive after irfā 'to know'. 14 Manfredi (2017: 139) states that if the subject has already been mentioned, it is modified by the determiner de (and kedé is not present).

( 'they went down (= went) at the station with the intention of taking the train' (Feghali 1938: 420) In the Arabic variety of Mardin, in south-eastern Turkey, ta also introduces goal subordinated clauses, in free variation with ləxāṭər (Grigore 2007: 312).

Other subordinators

In addition to the variants of the three subordinators presented above, other subordinators express purpose and/or consequence. Thus in Ḥassāniyya one finds iyyâk, an invariable form which is, moreover, the only subordinator given by Cohen (1963: 226) 'he left to (intending to) collect wood' (Taine-Cheikh 2019: 282) While the origin of iyyāk is probably optative (Woidich 2006: 369;Taine-Cheikh 2019: 281), its use in finals has been noted for a few rare speakers: not only in Ḥassāniyya, but also in Cairo (see ( 50)) and, in the form yāk or yākši, among the Moroccan Bedouins of the Zaër (Loubignac 1952: 589, 220/335) 'Open the door to let the smoke go away!' (Taine-Cheikh 2014: 433) The only equivalent of this subordinator is found in Shukriyya Arabic, where kān/akān can take on the values of chaining and consecution (Reichmuth 1983: 305). In Eastern Arabia, several subordinators are also in use. In addition to the regular uses of ḥatta (in) and the negative subordinator ˁan lā 'lest, so that not' seen earlier, Holes points to the rather infrequent use of ˁala šān/ˁašān 'so that' and ḥagg/ḥakk 'so that, in order to' ("whose main use is as a preposition meaning 'to, towards, for'"). ( 51 Woidich (2006: 379-380) distinguishes finals from consecutives, and while ˤašān (seen above) covers both uses, other subordinators seem to be more specialised: lagl for finals and lidaṛagit inn 'so sehr, dass' for consecutives. As for lamma, it is used in both but only introduces finals after an imperative (in which case its variant amma is used), as in: ( 52

Embedded questions

Indirect interrogatives depend on verbs that express interrogations more or less directly. They can be global or partial.

Yes-no questions

When the question applies to the embedded proposition as a whole, the embedding can be asyndetic (see Holes 2001: 385), but it is often effected using a specialized subordinator.

In his grammar of Cairo Arabic, Woidich studies interrogatives in detail. The main subordinators of indirect interrogatives (2006: 366), iza and in, are borrowed from the expression of condition and are, as in conditionals, always followed by kān, the verb 'to be' in the past tense. But he also observes the use, in addition to the complementizer inn, of the two particles used in global questions of direct interrogation: hal and ya taṛa. Feghali's considerations (1928: 226, note and 271) on the Lebanese languages are largely along the same lines. While ya tara is not mentioned and hal is given as an unusual classical particle, ˀen (or ˀeza) is found followed by kân. Feghali, however, gives examples where kân appears alone and can bear a suffix pronoun. This is precisely the configuration found in Ḥassāniyya (Taine-Cheikh 2014) where (yä)kân introduces, optionally, global questions of direct interrogation and, obligatorily, those of indirect interrogation. The frequent and sometimes mandatory presence of a subject suffix pronoun is an indication that it is no longer the temporal auxiliary of verbal origin, but a subordinator resulting from its grammaticalization. In this case, there is also a link between the interrogative particle and the conditional, since kân can be used in both cases, althought ilā is generally preferred for conditionals.

Wh-questions

For partial questions, the wh-words are the same, whether the question is direct or indirect. When they concern a particular element (wh-questions), they are introduced by an interrogative pronoun ('who?', 'what?'), an interrogative adverb ('how?', 'with what?', 'where?'...) or a noun phrase (prepositional or not) with an interrogative adjective ('which one?') -see for example Cowell (2005: 566-577) for Syrian Arabic.

The homonymy of some subordinators with wh-words has been noted. It is clear for bāš 'so that, in order that' and b-āš 'with what' (interrogative and relative) -composed, as we have seen, of two elements: the preposition b(i) and the interrogative pronoun (ā)š. A comparable origin has been proposed by Heath (2002: 494) for bayn 'that' from b(i) and the interrogative place adverb ayn -as an alternative to b(i) and the complementizer.

Partial conclusion

In the study of circumstantial clauses (as well as of ˤašān and ḥatta here), it has been noted that they can be introduced by the same subordinators. It has also been noted quite often (and here with ˤan, ḥatta, ḥagg, presumably (i)lā or (ˤa)la), that subordinators do not only introduce propositions, but also -or primarily-introduce noun phrases. They could therefore be seen as functionals with two specialisations. By focusing on completives, final and consecutive clauses, and indirect interrogatives, I have shown that the polyfunctionality of functionals goes beyond these two dimensions and that it is possible, at least in the margins, to identify transitions from one type of embedded clause to another, not only between verb-dependent clauses, but also between the latter and relatives, especially when the presence of the preposition b(i) before the relator (like əlli) or relative (like āš) facilitates the transition to an embedded clause where the head means 'the fact that'.

A study of Arabic dialects reveals the following shifts in meaning and grammaticalizations. a) The complementizer can stem from: a preposition (the case for ˤan); a relator (the case for əlli); a preposition followed by a relator (the case for bəlli) or a pronoun (the case for bāš/baš, also a purpose conjunction); the verb 'to say' (grammaticalized gāl).

b) The purpose conjunction, expressing a purpose or aim, can come from: a preposition (the case for ḥatta, ḥagg, ˤašān); a preposition followed by a relative/interrogative pronoun (the case for bāš/baš, also complementizer); an optative particle (the case for iyyāk, lamma); an interrogative particle (the case for (yä)kān); a future tense particle (the case for ta < preposition ḥatta).

c) The indirect interrogation particle can come from: the particle of the conditional (the case for iza, in); the direct interrogation particle (the case for hal, ya taṛa); the verb 'to be' as a past tense auxiliary (the case for kān).

Note that, overall, between the complementizer and the goal, the latter is usually the source and the former the target, whereas Heine and Kuteva (2002: 319) only indicate the opposite movement.

Verbal chains without a subordinator

In the absence of a subordinator, and insofar as the verb remains in a finite form (I am not exploring here cases where the verb is replaced by an action noun, see Holes 2016: 374), it is interesting to determine whether the construction presents two propositions, one of which is subordinated to the other, or whether it is a complex predicate composed of several verbal (or related) forms. This problem only arises if the two verbs (or predicates) have the same subject. Before studying these two cases separately, I will start by looking at those where the subjects are distinct.

Enjoining with distinct subjects

Complementation

Ḥassāniyya is one of the Arabic dialects where the presence of a complementizer depends essentially on the semantics of the verb of the main clause. After verbs of request and will (see ( 53)) -including after the verb 'to say' when it expresses a request (see (54)) and is not declarative-the construction is asyndetic. The same applies to verbs such as 'let (do)', 'allow', 'accept', 'wait' or 'send (do)' (see ( 55)) as well as to verbs of perception such as 'see' or 'hear' (see ( 56) and ( 57)). ( 53 The expression of a subject co-referent with the personal index of the complement verb is mandatory. It is usually a direct object pronominal complement which is suffixed to the main verb as in ( 53) and ( 56). It can be an indirect object complement, in which case the pronoun is suffixed to the preposition, as after gâl in (54). Finally, it can be a definite nominal, as in ( 55), 16 and it is then necessarily placed between the two verbs. The verb of the completive clause is always in the imperfective, except in the case of perception verbs. Some verbs (like 'to run') are also followed by an imperfective and a participle. 17 One can even have a verb in the perfectivized form (e.g. ġannä in ( 56)) which would place the fact in the past). Example ( 57 [START_REF] Tauzin | Contes arabes de Mauritanie[END_REF]: 50) In Ḥassāniyya, various constraints bear on the construction, but embedding is essentially marked by intonation. Indeed the embedded proposition could exist independently of the main clause, with the personal index as the only subject (except for the specific case of participles after a perception verb). This is not the case in all languages, as the imperfective alone is often the subjunctive mode, distinct from the indicative mode. We saw with Bloch (section 2.1.2) that where verbal modes were distinguished, the use of the complementizer could become secondary, the presence vs. absence of the indicative particle (b in his examples) being sufficient to differentiate between the expression of the statement and the modal verb (wish, etc.). This analysis seems to apply to Moroccan Arabic. Indeed, the complementizer bəlli is not mandatory if the grammatical subject of the subordinate is expressed by a pronoun in the main clause (Caubet 1993: I, 232). Note in (58) the presence of the particle ka-after the declarative verb, whereas the most numerous examples follow a modal verb and have no particle: (58) ka-nˤṛəf-u ka-yfhəm ər-rīfīya 'I know he understands Rifian Berber.' [START_REF] Caubet | L'arabe marocain[END_REF]: I, 232) However, the opposition between syndetic vs. asyndetic constructions depending on the semantics of the main verb has not disappeared in all the languages, even among those which mark the declarative mode. Thus, Eastern Arabian speakers have retained the difference (Holes 2016: 378 ff.). Many verbs -of saying, ordering, ordaining (see ( 59)), vowing, truth-telling...; wanting (see (60)), liking; hoping, expecting, fearing; agreeing, consenting, daring; allowing (see ( 61)), letting, causing, forcing-are constructed without a complementizer (and usually without an indicative particle). The presence between the two verbs of a subject nominal of V1 in (59) and a direct object nominal of V1 in ( 61 DEF-donkey dance.IPFV.3M.SG 'you will see a [the] paunch dancing, and its intestines dancing, and the head of the donkey dancing' (Tauzin 1993: 56). 17 Grotzfeld (1965: 103) also observes in Syrian Arabic that the participle frequently replaces the finite verb after verbs of perception:

(ii) ˀəza sməˤtī-ni dāyre b-əž-žārūše when hear.PFV.2F.SF-PR.1SG turn.PTCP.F.SG in-DEF-gristmill 'when you hear I'm turning the gristmill ' Grotzfeld (1965: 103) This innovative feature, specific to cases where the subjects are different, parallels the one observed in final clauses introduced by ˤašán (section 2.2.2).

Propositions of purpose and result

Propositions of purpose and consequence are attested in Ḥassāniyya without subordinators and with different subjects, as for instance in ( 64) and ( 65

Full verbs with co-referent subjects

Some clauses (completives as well as finals or consecutives) have a subject which is co-referent with that of the main clause. This happens frequently and the verbs which then appear in the main clause show little semantic variation. The subject of the verb of the embedded clause is represented only by the personal index, but a (pro)nominal subject may be present before V1 (see ( 76) and ( 80)) or between V1 and V2 (see ( 70), ( 77) and ( 78)). With the exception of Juba Arabic, in all the languages of the sample, the verb of the embedded clause is usually in the imperfective, while that of the main clause varies.

Complementation

In Ḥassāniyya, the verb âbä 'to refuse' is constructed with a complementizer if the subjects are different, but the construction is asyndetic when the subjects are identical as in ( 70 (Tauzin1993: 28) In Emirati Arabic, the same type of construction is found after verbs like žəba 'want', ḥabb 'like' and ḥāwal 'try' described as "control verbs" (Leung and al. 2021: 223-4 (Woidich 2006: 391) In all of the above examples, the subject of the verb of the completive is expressed only by the personal index. In Juba Arabic (where there are neither personal indices amalgamated with the verb nor clitic pronouns, but only independent pronouns), the subject of the completive is not expressed when it is identical to the subject of the main verb: (74) úmon der rówa júba they want go Juba 'They want to go to Juba.' (Manfredi 2017: 141) The difference between embedding after a full verb and a complex predicate with an auxiliary first verb (studied in section 3.3) can be tenuous. It is especially so in the last example taken from Juba Arabic where the construction with different subjects is possible -as for the examples taken from other dialects-but implies the presence of the modality kedé (see ( 63)), excluded here.

Final and consecutive clauses

In the absence of a subordinator, constructions correspond more to intention or aim than to the explicit expression of a goal or consequence, but only the translations reflect these nuances. Some verbs, such as movement verbs, appear to be particularly frequent, even if they are not the only ones (see kṣaṛ 'to cut' in (76) and ižîbu 'to bring' in ( 77)). In Ḥassāniyya, the presence of the future auxiliary (lāhi) is frequent before the imperfective of the subordinate proposition, but it is not obligatory. One could -without changing the meaning-add əyyâk or bâš in the following examples, provided that lāhi is deleted in ( 76) and ( 77 [START_REF] Tauzin | Contes arabes de Mauritanie[END_REF]: 100) The use of lâhi in Ḥassāniyya can probably be compared to that of ḅədd-PR 'to want' in Syrian Arabic. According to Grozfeld (1965: 105-6), ḅədd-PR indeed often introduces the final clause if the subjects are identical, especially after motion verbs where subordinators (ta, ḥatta, laḥatta, la and mənšān) can be omitted (see ( 78)). ( 78 'Daddy has gone to pray the holiday prayer' (Cowell 2005: 352) It is again with displacement verbs such as nizil 'go down', giri 'run' and xašš 'enter' that one finds asyndetic final or consecutive propositions with identical subjects in Cairo (Woidich 2006: 379, 380).

Two (or more) verbs, one predicate

In Arabic, two (or more) verbs with a shared subject often form a monopredicative and monoclausal sequence. In this case, there is only one full verb, the other(s) being reduced, even if reduced verbs can have a finite form with a personal index that is co-referent with the main verb. Three cases of multiverbal monoclausal sequence are to be distinguished: auxiliation, pragmatization and serialization. The reduced verb -which I underline-comes first (sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2) or last (section 3.3.3). Moreover, the reduced verb must necessarily present the same basic aspectuo-temporal marker as the main verb in the case of pragmatization and serialization (sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3), but regularly presents different markers in the case of auxiliation (section 3.3.1). Finally, the reduced verb may undergo a change in meaning, or even in form, as compared to its use as a full verb.

Auxiliation

Auxiliation is an extremely frequent phenomenon which plays a very important role in the history of Arabic and, more broadly, in the history of Chamito-Semitic (see [START_REF] Cohen | La phrase nominale et l'évolution du système verbal en sémitique[END_REF]. It is basically the means by which Arabic dialects have acquired the possibility of expressing epistemic and deontic modalities. It is also through this means that dialects have often enriched the basic system with new aspectual, temporal and aspectuo-temporal values. While the phenomenon is widespread in Arabic dialects and has been the subject of many presentations, details diverge, both in the choice of the full verb at the origin of the auxiliary and in the degree of grammaticalization of the latter. If we consider, for example, the expression of the future tense in Arabic dialects (Taine-Cheikh 2004), we find that some verbs are used in a finite form, notably those meaning 'to desire' -b(a)ġā 'to desire' in Najd, (a)rād in Eastern Syria, dār in Ḥassāniyya (by metathesis of (a)rād?), dawwar in Chad, šāˀa/išta in Yemen-, but that others, in particular certain displacement verbs meaning 'to go' or 'to leave', are used in a participial form (variable or not), such as māši and ġādi in the Maghreb, sēyyer in Maltese and ṛāyəḥ in the Middle East. However, these two cases are far from exhausting all possibilities, on the one hand because some morphemes of the future tense originate in non-verbal forms -as is the case of the preposition ḥatta(y) > ta-, on the other hand, because future tense morphemes are very often reduced to invariable particles or preverbs whose etymology is not always as easily identifiable as ġādi and šāˀa/išta as being the etymologies, respectively, of Moroccan ġa and Yemeni ša-/š-. I will reserve the term auxiliary here for verbal and related forms only, namely finite forms, participial forms and pseudo-verbs composed of a nominal form or a preposition followed by a pronoun suffix. These three cases are illustrated by the following examples borrowed from Ḥassāniyya: the invariable participle lāhi for the future tense (see in ( 75) and ( 82)), the finite verb gädd in (81) for internal possibility or capacity, the pseudo-verb aṯ(ə)ṛ-PR (< aṯ(ə)ṛ 'trace') in ( 82 (Tauzin 1993: 136) In Arabic, auxiliarity is often studied in relation to deontic and epistemic modalities (see e.g. the tables in Leung and al. 2021: 254 and 261). An important contribution on this issue can be found in the article by [START_REF] Vanhove | The grammaticalization of modal auxiliaries in Maltese and Arabic vernaculars of the Mediterranean area[END_REF] from which I borrow the following data for several dialectal areas. They concern only epistemic modalities, which are less numerous than deontic modalities. Verbal forms are in the majority and can be either frozen (in a single finite form) or inflected -in the perfective (such as yaf and qdər), in the imperfective (like yəmkən and ikun/ikūn) or in the participle form (like mumkin and lāzim). 20 The other forms are constructed with a preposition (like għand-) or a noun preceded by a preposition (like bədd-). Of the 90 examples in the article, the vast majority of the main verbs following the auxiliary are in the imperfective (usually alone, exceptionally preceded by the b-marker). The only exceptions are some examples with the auxiliary ykūn (more rarely kān) of the verb 'to be', on the one hand, and a Maltese construction with mess (of the verb 'to touch') modelled on vernacular Italian, on the other.

Auxiliaries are also used to express values which depending on the author, are considered as more aspectual or more temporal (see [START_REF] Cohen | Le système verbal sémitique et l'expression du temps[END_REF]: 266, Mitchell and Al-Hassan 1994: 36, Brustad 2000: 144, 193): those of inchoativity, ingressivity, continuity, cessation and resultativity, and here again there is some variation from one speaker to another, both in the choice of auxiliary and in the semantics contributed. (Tauzin 1993: 4) Moreover, while baqaˀ > bgä is only used as a stative verb with the meaning 'to remain' in Ḥassāniyya, baqaˀ gave an auxiliary (with various realizations) in many dialects: e.g. as a continuative in Maltese (Stolz & Amman 2008), 21 as a continuative and inchoative in Damascus (Lentin 2006: 553) and as an inchoative in Juba Arabic (in which case it is preceded by the irrealis marker bi, see Manfredi 2017: 102). Stative verbs are probably, together with desire verbs and verbs of position, movement or displacement (Taine-Cheikh 2018), one of the main semantic subcategories at the origin of auxiliaries. The possible negation (see ( 81)) is usually carried by the auxiliary. The same is true for the aspectuo-temporal markers of the complex predicate, the main verb being almost always in the imperfective: compare ( 83 As a result, this first type of complex predicate remains very similar, in its syntactic construction, to the asyndetic complex sentences with identical subjects, and when it clearly differs from them, this is mainly due to the fact that the auxiliary has taken on a specific meaning or that it has become less variable, or even frozen. However, there are particular cases where, in some languages, some auxiliary verbs can be constructed with a verb in the perfective. In the case of Darfur Arabic, this is explained, according to Roset (2018: 261), by the fact that this dialect tends to put both verbs in the same form ( (Roset 2018: 261). In Cairo Arabic, this case occurs in particular (but not only) with the verb rigiˤ 'return', which, as an auxiliary, means 'again' and is then often accompanied by tāni. The replacement of a V 2 in the imperfective with a V 2 in the perfective indicates that it is a fact actually realized in the past as in (85). 23(85) rigiˤ hirib tāni return.PFV.3M.SG flee.PFV.3M.SG again 'he fled again' (Woidich 2002: 128) For a broader overview of the use of a perfective or a participle after an auxiliary in the Near East, see Lentin 1994: 26-27.

Pragmatization

The second type of complex predicate concerns only a very small number of verbs, usually of position, movement or displacement. It is formally characterised by the fact that the two verb forms share the same aspect (the completed form most often, but not only, see Woidich (2006: 329)). Semantically, the first verb changes its meaning to take on an essentially discursive value. Its presence serves to emphasize the suddenness or simply the happening of an event in a narrative. In Ḥassāniyya, this type of predicate, which arises mostly with the verb gâm 'to get up' and, more marginally, with the verb gbađ̣ 'to take' [START_REF] Taine-Cheikh | Faits de grammaticalisation et processus narratifs. Les verbes 'se (re)dresser' et 'prendre' dans l'arabe mauritanien[END_REF], 2018), often occurs as a pseudo-coordination with w(ä)/u 'and', but it can also occur without a coordinator. There are thus two distinct grammaticalizations with the verb gâm (both cases are present in (86)): one as an inchoative auxiliary where V 2 is in the imperfective, the other as a discourse marker -with or without a coordinatorwhere V 2 is in the perfective. As discourse markers, gâm and gbađ̣ are not always translated (as in ( 86) and ( 87)) and their enunciative role often appears only when the whole text is taken into account (see Taine-Cheikh 2018: 237) (Tauzin 1993: 24) These examples show that the subject (lə-mˤalläm, šärtât and uṃṃ-u) can follow V 1 in both cases and that V 1 agrees with it in gender and number. On the other hand, the presence of a negation seems to be excluded (especially in V 1 ). 25 In other Arabic dialects, the use of the verb 'to stand up' (qām/gām/ˀām or nāḍ/nāđ) is relatively frequent as an inchoative auxiliary, 26 and its use with the meaning 'and then' (in a structure with or without a coordinator) is pointed out by Marcel Cohen (1924: 267). 27 In fact, the absence of a coordinator is common among non-Ḥassāniyya speakers and [START_REF] Fischer | Unterordnende und nebenordnende Verbalkomposita in den neuarabischen Dialekten und im Schriftarabischen[END_REF] considers it a nebenordnende Komposition -as opposed to the unterordnende Komposition where gām is followed by a V 2 in the imperfective or a participle. The presentation adopted by Reichmuth for the West Sudanese dialect (with a slash between the two verbs) also points in the direction of an apposition: (88) gāman/ rawwaḥan kullahin [gām-PFV.3F.PL] go_away.PFV.3F.PL all 'Then they all went away' [START_REF] Reichmuth | Der arabische Dialekt der Shukriyya im Ostsudan[END_REF]: 295) However, this apposition does not seem to be marked either by a pause between V 1 and V 2 or by specific intonation. This same gām construction, with or without a coordinator, is found notably in Eastern Arabia (Holes 2001: 442) (Bettini 2006: 117) Comparable discourse uses are also found with other verbs, such as 'to come': ža/ǧa/gih in Egyptian Arabic (Woidich 2002: 161) and especially ža in Moroccan Arabic [START_REF] Caubet | élément narratif dans le récit familier en arabe marocain[END_REF], which tends to be followed by the autonomous pronoun huwa (but without a coordinator). The same may have happened in the past with the verb 'to return' ˤād, which is now found as a frozen particle with adverbial meaning (ˤad 'then, again' in Moroccan, see Brustad 2000: 160-1), unless it is the grammaticalization of an older auxiliary construction.

Serialization

"The term 'serial verbs' is used in the literature to indicate a verbal syntagm consisting of two (or more) finite verbs without a formal coordinating marker but with the same argument structure, one of which is semantically demoted, often grammaticalized, and lexically restricted" [START_REF] Versteegh | Serial verbs[END_REF]: 195, citing Sebba 1987:39). This definition could have been applied to the second type of complex predicate when the coordinator is absent, as in ( 86) and ( 87), but I will retain here the "classical" definition of serial verbs according to which "it is the second verb that is lexically restricted" (Versteegh 2009: 197) -it is this one that I underline. As a result, examples of serial verbs in Arabic dialects become much rarer. The first case, reported especially in pidginized and creolized forms of Arabic, is where a more or less grammaticalized and bleached form of the verb 'to say' follows a declarative verb without introducing a true complement, as in the example of Juba Arabic: ( 90 (Woidich 2002: 183) 24 šärtât is among the (usually borrowed) nominals which do not take the definite article. 25 I have not seen an example with negation before V2 in Ḥassāniyya, but Woidich (2006: 330) gives one for Cairo Arabic. 26 So is the verb 'to sit' (qˤad/gˤad, žilis/gləs or gannab) -although it is even more frequently a concomitant or continuative auxiliary-and so are some displacement verbs originally meaning 'to go', 'to come' or 'to return' which have yielded, among others, inchoativity and iterativity auxiliaries (see Taine-Cheikh 2018: 230-4). 27 For Grotzfeld (1965: 89-90) this use "signals the occurrence of a new, nondurative event in the past" and for [START_REF] Firanescu | Le modalisateur aspectuel-temporel qām dans le parler syrien[END_REF] it is an "event inchoative" (see Versteegh 2009: 196). El-Minya 'wir zogen um nach El-Minya' = 'we moved to El-Minya' [START_REF] Woidich | Verbalphrasen mit asyndetischem Perfekt im Ägyptisch-Arabischen[END_REF] 183) The second case could be verbs used in the perfective with punctuative value. 28 The construction noted in Abbéché (Roth 1979: 58) with ǧa 'come' and fāt 'pass' in V 2 , to emphasize the completion of an action, seems to comply with the definition of serialization, including the bleaching of V 2 and its agreement in person and conjugation with V [START_REF] Fischer | Die Sprache der arabischen Sprachinsel in Uzbekistan[END_REF] 258) The use of displacement verbs in second position to express a movement in relation to the speaker can be found elsewhere, in constructions other than serial verbs, which are not very frequent in dialectal Arabic. Thus, in this case, in Ḥassāniyya, the participles mâši and especially žây are used, as in (98): (98) gâm ṛâžəˤ žây start.PFV.3SG go_back.PTCP.SG come.PTCP.SG 'He started to retrace his steps (towards us)' (Tauzin 1993: 4) The negation of žây (...mā-hu žây) or its replacement by mâši means that the movement is not towards, or is moving away from, the speaker. One cannot speak of serial verbs because V 1 (here ṛâžəˤ) can be either in the perfective or the imperfective while V 2 (žây) always remains in the participle form: (98') ṛžaˤ žây go_back.PFV.3SG come.PTCP.SG 'He retraced his steps (towards us)' If we follow Fischer, who proposes for the final -k of ġadāk and ǧāk in Uzbek Arabic an etymology from kēn < kāhin [START_REF] Fischer | Die Sprache der arabischen Sprachinsel in Uzbekistan[END_REF]: 257 note 4), one may wonder whether it is not this suffix which, without having retained its original meaning, gives the verbal forms their ability to appear in a serial structure.

Partial conclusion

There are undoubtedly important relationships between the different constructions studied in this section and it is not always easy to draw watertight boundaries, notably between embeddings with identical subjects and complex predicates with auxiliaries, especially since the list of auxiliarized verbs varies depending on the language considered. However, the syntactic analysis leads to rather divergent results. In the first case, V 2 is dependent on V 1 and this dependence can be particularly marked if V 2 is present in a modal form that would be excluded in V 1 (hence the qualification of "impoverished embedded clauses" used by some authors -see for instance Leung and al. 2021: 231-232). In the second case, V 2 is the main verb and it is the one that carries the predicative function, even if it is almost always in the imperfective and thus has a lot in common with the V 2 of the embedded clause. While auxiliarization is very productive in dialectal Arabic, there are two other complex constructions composed of a sequence of verbs. Such sequences are characterized both by the fact that the two verbs share the same aspectuo-temporal morphemes, and that one of the verbs tends to de-semantize or even freeze. The bleached verb belongs to a very small list of verbs (mostly position, movement and displacement verbs). When it comes first, it serves as a discursive marker and expresses a more or less sudden sequence. When it comes second, it can have a syntactic function (to introduce a direct complement), an enunciative function (to mark centrifugal or centripetal movement in relation to the speaker) or serve as a discursive final punctuation mark. The first of these two constructions has its origin in a sequence of coordinated verbs and the second, if not derived from it, at least has a close relationship with it.

Conclusions

In Arabic dialects, asyndetic constructions are very widespread. As a consequence, a succession of two finite verbs can correspond to a variety of structures. If it is an embedded proposition, it may or may not have the same subject as the verb of the main proposition, and it may be a completive or a subordinate of purpose or consequence. In the case of a single proposition with a main verb accompanied by a bleached, grammaticalised or even frozen verb, the subject is always the same and the structure presents connections either with embedding (for auxiliarization), or with juxtaposition or coordination (for pragmatization and serialization). In the case of embedded propositions with non-co-referent subjects, the subject of V 2 is frequently a personal pronoun affixed to V 1 . Vincent (1993: 13) provides the example of Maltese and analyzez this construction as a 'raising' on the head verb (Head-Marking Complement Strategy) resulting, together with the personal index of V 2 , in double subject marking. This construction -similar to the one found in languages such as English where V 2 is in the infinitive-is very common in Arabic dialects, although it does not prevent the presence of a nominal subject in rarer cases. Regarding the opposition between finite verb vs. infinitive, it should be noted that Arabic is an exception to the universal tendency stated by [START_REF] Haspelmath | From purposive to infinitive-an universal path of Grammaticization[END_REF], with the absence of infinitive in goal propositions, as well as in completives. As for embedded propositions, both asyndetic and syndetic constructions are attested in all Arabic dialects. Sometimes there is a choice in the use of a subordinator or not, but this choice often depends on different factors. The most important one, for completives, is the choice of the main verb and, depending on its meaning, of the declarative~constative or optative~desiderative mode of the subordinate. But other factors may come into play, such as the subject function of the subordinate or the shared identity or not of the subjects. The presence of the subordinator in goal subordinates may correspond to a more explicit aim, but further research is needed. It should be noted that in some languages there is a tendency, in the absence of the subordinator, to use a particular auxiliary (future or intention), especially with identical subjects. On the other hand, it is when the subjects are different that Juba Arabic uses a modality (kedé, with optative value -see Manfredi 2017: 112-113) after the subordinator of final clauses (as well as in volitional completives without a subordinator). The study of the different embedding marks (complementizers, subordinators of purpose and consequence, particles of global indirect interrogation) shows that, behind certain specializations, partly common to all dialects and partly specific to particular areas or dialects, there is a non-negligible tendency to shift from one domain to another -including from relators to complementizers or subordinators of purpose and consequence. The combination of a relator and a preposition undoubtedly plays a role in this process, which deserves further investigation. At the end of this study, which has tried to give a detailed account of both the common features and some of the divergences observed, we can indeed see the opening up of other areas of research, such as that of converbs, which could shed light on -or complete-the issue of serial verbs.

  he was going to marry her [...], that he no longer liked hedgehogs'

	(7) gâl		l-hä	ənn-u	lâhi	išədd-hä [...]
	say.PFV.3M.SG	to-PR.3F.SG	COMP-PR.3M.SG	FUT	marry.IPFV.3M.SG-PR.3F.SG
	w	ənn-u	gâˤ	lə-gnāvîd	mā	yəbqî-hum
	and COMP-PR.3M.SG certainly	DEF-hedgehogs	NEG	like.IPFV.3M.SG-PR.3PL
	'he said

  note 176) to explain the appearance of ˤan in Bahrayn as a complementizer in some rare examples such as:

	(23) hādi	l-wakˁa	mā yinˁirif		ˁan-ha	tšibb
	DEM	DEF-calamity	NEG know.PASS.IPFV.3M.SG	COMP-PR.3F.SG	start.IPFV.3F.SG
	bi	l-lēl	aw	bi	n-nahār
	in	DEF-night	or	in	DEF-day

  Among the non-specialized complementizers, we must mention the case of functionals which were originally relators. Woidich gives a series of examples where illi replaces inn when the predicate of the main proposition (often in the 1st person)

	28) b-etqól-		l-ak	el-máṛa	ta	tbîˤ-ne	ṛaṭḷ	zait
	IND-say.PFV.1SG	to-PR.2M.SG DEF-women COMP	give.IPFV.2M.SG-PR.1PL	ratl[of] oil
	'my wife (= the...) makes you say to give me a ratl of oil'		(Feghali 1938: 422)
	(29) bédd-ak			mén-ne	ta	qól-		l-ak	ed-déġre
	want-PR.2M.SG		from-PR.1PL COMP	say.IPFV.1SG	to-PR.2M.SG DEF-truth
	'do you want me to tell you the truth?' (=that I speak to you frankly)'	(Feghali 1938: 422)
	expresses emotion, as in:
	(30) ana	mabṣūṭ		illi	mā-		gā-š
	I	be_glad.PTCP.M.SG	COMP	NEG 1		come.PFV.3M.SG-NEG 2
	'I'm glad he didn't come.'					(Woidich 2006: 387)
	The two examples given by

  bāš/baš or bēš is found as far as Libya, in Muslim Tripoli (see (

						)) or bbāš (see (35)).
	(34) w-dxal	wust-hum	bāš	yṛayyđ̣ u			ˤan-hum	s-sbaˤ
	and go_into.PFV.3M.SG the_middle[of]-PR.3M.PL to	keep_away.IPFV.3M.PL		from-PR.3M.PL	DEF-lion
	'[...] and went into the middle of them, to keep the lion away from him'			(Heath 2003: 114)
	(35) gīs-u	bbāš	igūl-	l-ak	đa	lli	idawṛ
	go_see.IMP.SG-PR.3M.SG	so_that	say.IPFV.3M.SG	to-PR.2M.SG	this	REL	want.IPFV.3M.SG
	'go see him so he can tell you what he wants'			(Ould Mohamed Baba 2008: 74)

  ašán introduces only final clauses, but Manfredi notes the presence of the modality kedé after ašán when the subjects are different: 14 this is the case in (41), whereas in (42), where the subject of the subordinate is identical to that of the main, kedé is absent:

	IND-prepare.IPFV.1SG	to	get_up.IPFV.1SG
	'I prepare to get up'						(Woidich 2006: 379)
	But it can also, especially after a question, be interpreted as a consequence as in:
	(40) ana ˤamalt-		il-ak	ˀē	ˤašān	tišawwaḥ	l-i
	I	do.PFV.1SG	to-PR.2M.SG	what	so_that	make_gesture.IPFV.2M.SG	at-PR.1SG
	'what did I do to you that made you gesture at me like that?'			(Woidich 2006: 380)
	In Juba Arabic, (41) lázim	úmon	bi-wónusu		le-nas	ašán	kedé	nas	bi-fáhimu
	need		they	IRR-talk		to-people	so	MOD	people	IRR-understand
	'They need to talk to people so people can understand'			(Manfredi 2017: 138)

12

Pereira (2010: 395) gives a variant of example (38) beginning with bāš. It is quite rare for the subordinate clause to come first in this way.

13

  This marking is an innovation specific to Juba Arabic, as Manfredi points out, but in other languages the identical or different character of the subjects can also play a certain role. Thus in Emirati Arabic, the presence of ˤašān is optional with different subjects and mandatory when the subjects are identical, as in (43).The classical Arabic ḥattā, used as a preposition with the meaning 'until' and a conjunction with the meaning 'in order that, so that', is often used to introduce a final or consecutive clause, in this form or (with apheresis) in the form ta, in Middle Eastern varieties. ḥatta (and especially ḥatta in) is the usual conjunction in the Emirates among the Bahraini: Cowell gives, for Syrian Arabic, the variants ta, ḥatta and laḥatta (as well as la alone) with the sense of '(in order) to, so that', in propositions which he calls "optative clauses" and which can follow any main proposition. Feghali's examples where ta introduces completives, but ta is also very regularly used in Lebanon as the subordinator of final clauses (Feghali specifies that the form ḥatta is not used).

	42) ána	ázu	serír	ašán	bi-númu	fógo
	I	want	bed		to	IRR-sleep	in.ANAPH
	'I want a bed to sleep in.'					(Manfredi 2017: 138)
						15
	(43) tˤəlaˤna		ˤašān		nāxəđ	bītza
	go_out.PFV.1PL	in_order-to	buy.IPFV.1PL	pizza
	'We went out to buy a pizza.'					(Leung and al. 2021: 371)
	2.2.3 ḥatta and ta
	(44) axamr-uh			u	askī-h		ḥatta in
	compost.IPFV.1SG-PR.3M.SG	and	water.IPFV.1SG-PR.3M.SG	in_order_that
	il-milūḥa	tinzil			fi	l-arḍ
	DEF-salinity	diminish.IPFV.3F.SG	in	DEF-soil
	(45) kallaf-ni		dabbər-	l-o	bēt	ḥatta	yəskon	fī
	ask.PFV.3M.SG-PR.1SG find.IPFV.1SG	to-PR.3M.SG house in_order_to	live.IPFV.3M.SG	in.PR.3M.SG
	'He's asked me to find him a house to live in'			(Cowell 2005: 353)
	(46) tfaḍḍal		laḥatta		ˀaržī-k		hall-i	ˤand-i
	come_in.IMP.M.SG	so_that		show.IPFV.1SG-PR.2M.SG	what-PR.1SG	at-PR.1SG
	'Come in, so that I may show you what I have'			(Cowell 2005: 353)
	We have seen (section 2.1.3) (47) nezlu ˤa-l-mḥaṭṭa	ta		yâxdu	t-t rân
	go_off.PFV.3PL	at-DEF-station	with_the_intention_of	take.IPFV.3PL	DEF-train

'I compost it and water it, in order that the salinity in the soil will be reduced'

(Holes 2016: 394)

  Besides (b)bāš and iyyāk, one also finds in Ḥassāniyya (yä)kān which can express a value of consecution, even if this is not its most frequent meaning (Taine-Cheikh 2014: 433).

	(50) äftaḥ	əl-bâb	kân	yəmši		əd-daxxân
	open.IMP.M.SG	DEF-door	so	go_away.IPFV.3M.SG	DEF-smoke
				.
	(49) ˀumt	atmašša		fi l-ˀōḍa	iyyāk	yigī-	l-i	nōm
	begin.PFV.1SG pace_up_and_down.IPFV.1SG	in DEF-room so_that come.IPFV.3M.SG to-PR.1SG sleep
	'I began to pace up and down the room so that sleep might come'			(Woidich 2006: 369)

  Similar examples without a complementizer (and usually without an indicative particle) can be found elsewhere (see in particularWoidich 2006: 391 and Pereira 2010: 391), but often in lesser numbers. Manfredi notes that in declarative completives in Juba Arabic, there is sometimes an asyndetic construction after the verb gále

									) is noteworthy.
	(59) amarō-na		l-ḥukūma	nidfin-ha
		order.PFV.3PL-PR.1PL	DEF-government	block_up.IPFV.1PL-PR.3F.SG
		'The government ordered us to block it (=a well) up'		(Holes 2016: 378)
	(60) abġī-h				yirūḥ
		want.PFV.1SG-PR.3M.SG		go.IPFV.3M.SG
		'I want him to go'						(Holes 2016: 378)
	(61) itxallīn			bint-ič		itxalliṣ	madrasa?
		let.IPFV.2F.SG		daughter-PR.2F.SG	complete.IPFV.3F.SG	school
		'Are you going to let your daughter complete her schooling?'	(Holes 2016: 382)
	used with its lexical meaning of 'to say':
	(62) úo	gále	úmon	gi-rówa		amarát
		he	say	they	NPONC-go		Amarat
		'He said they are going to Amarat neighborhood.'			(Manfredi 2017: 144)
	He also notes, in volitional completives, the presence of the modality kedé as in (63):
	(63) ána	der	íta	kedé	rówa		ma-kál	táki	fi-kartúm
		I	want	you	MOD	go		with-uncle	POSS.2SG	in-Khartoum
		'I want you to go with your uncle to Khartoum.'			(Manfredi 2017: 142)
	16 For our informant, the following example is ungrammatical if the article is not added before kärš:
	(i)	lâhi tšowvi	[l-]kärš	təṛgəṣ,		wə	mṣāṛîn-hä	yəṛ ə gṣu	u
		FUT see.IPFV.2F.SG	[DEF]-paunch	dance.IPFV.3F.SG	and intestines[of]-PR.3F.SG	dance.IPFV.3PL	and
		ṛâṣ	lə-ḥmâr		yəṛgəṣ
		head[of]

Table 1 :

 1 Values of epistemic modal auxiliaries (according to[START_REF] Vanhove | The grammaticalization of modal auxiliaries in Maltese and Arabic vernaculars of the Mediterranean area[END_REF]

		Maltese auxiliaries	Moroccan auxiliaries Egyptian and Levantine auxiliaries
	Eventuality	seta', jaf (rare)	yəmkən	bi-(ḥa-)yiˀdar
	Feasibility	seta'	qdər	mumkin, yimkin
	Probability	seta', ikun	qdər (frozen)	yimkin, bədd-PR + yikūn, lāzim (frozen) + ḥa/bi-
	Logical probability għand-PR, ikollu, ikun xəṣṣ-PR, ykūn	bədd-+ yikūn, lāzim (frozen) + yikūn
	Calculation	kellu	xəṣṣ-PR, ykūn

  Thus the auxiliary tämm (INACC itämm) which expresses continuity in Ḥassāniyya (see (83)) -next to mā-zâl 'do not cease (to)'-, has a pure inchoative use among the Zaër of Morocco, and a dual meaning, both continuative and terminative (closer to the literary sense of completion), in the Tunisian dialects of Takroûna and the Marazig (see Taine-Cheikh 2017).

	(83) tämmət	və ḥrîṯət-hä	təgžî-hä	iläyn
	continue.PFV.3F.SG in field[of]-PR.3F.SG	plow.IPFV.3F.SG-PR.3F.SG	until
	žâ-hä		ṛâžəl (...)
	arrive.PFV.3M.SG-PR.3M.SG	man
	'She was there plowing her field when a man arrived'.

  , while in the Bedouin Arabic of West Syria[START_REF] Bettini | Contes féminins de la Haute Jézireh syrienne. Matériaux ethno-linguistiques d'un parler nomade oriental[END_REF], we find examples with gām but especially with giđ̣ ab 'to seize' (corresponding to the Ḥassāniyya gbađ̣ with metathesis):

	(89) gđ̣ uban	gālan
	[giđ̣ ab-PFV.3F.PL]	say.PFV.3F.PL
	'So they said'

  This example is reminiscent of the constructions of Egyptian Arabic that Woidich describes as "Pseudo-Komplementation", in particular the one where ˀāl 'say' comes as V 2 after a first verb with which it agrees in person and conjugation:

	) ána	báda	kóre	gále	la la la
	I	start	scream	say	no no no
	'I started screaming: no, no, no!'		(Manfredi 2017: 143)
	(91) ikkallimti	ˀulti	ˀē?
	speak.PFV.2F.SG	say.PFV.2F.SG	what
	'what did you say?'

  The presence of V 2 thus makes possible of the addition of a direct complement (often ˀē 'what?') or a modifier. In the same vein, a verb like rāḥ can be combined with various movement verbs like miši 'to go', gih 'to come', nizil 'to go down' and hirib 'to flee', to express a direction (often fēn 'where?'): This type of construction, also noted with other verbs (like žā in Farafra), alternates with a construction with coordination, as

	(92) nimši		nrūḥ	fēn?
	go_away.IPFV.1SG		go.IPFV.1SG	where
	'where shall we go?'		(Woidich 2002: 183)
	Woidich notes. Compare (93) and (93'):
	(93) ˤazzilna		ruḥna	lMaˤādi
	go_away.PFV.1PL		go_towards.PFV.1PL	Maadi
	'we moved to Maadi'		(Woidich 2002: 183)
	(93') ˤazzilna	w	ruḥna	lMinya
	go_away.ACC.1PL and go_towards.ACC.1PL

  According toVersteegh (2005: 60-61), however, these examples "should rather be considered as directional verbs that indicate the direction towards or from the focus of the utterance. A similar function is performed by jāk and ġadāk in Uzbekistan

					1 :
	(94) gallolo		ǧo
	return_back.PFV.3PL	come.PFV.3PL
	'they came back'			(Roth 1979: 58)
	(95) maša		fāt
	go_away.PFV.3SG	go_away.PFV.3SG
	'he went'			(Roth 1979: 58)
	Arabic (cf. Fischer 1961: 258)":
	(96) ˤal	čūl	ṭalaˤ	ġadāk
	to	steppe	enter.PFV.3SG	go_away.PFV.3SG
	'He went into the steppe'			(Fischer 1961: 258)
	(97) ˤašir	dukkonāt	arīz-ātin	ǧāb-in	ǧāk
	ten	shops	money.PL	bring.PFV.3SG-PR.3PL	come.PFV.3SG
	'He brought in the money from ten shops'

Circumstantial clauses are therefore outside my scope.

In Tauzin's transcription (from whom I borrowed the examples cited), these two phonemes are not distinguished when /a/ is in a neutral context (not emphatic). Arbitrarily, I replace her e with a schwa. In my dictionary (Taine-Cheikh 1988:

34), however, I chose the variant /a/, perhaps due to the influence of Middle (mixed) Arabic where it is found in abundance.

Marçais (1977: 232) reports the use of bayn and bīn (ən preceded by the preposition bi) in Moroccan and Oranian after verbs and phrases expressing a somewhat solemn declaration such as 'swear'. For[START_REF] Heath | Jewish and Muslim Dialects of Moroccan Arabic[END_REF]

494), bayn and bin are among the "quotative (or factive) 'that' complementizers" attested quite widely in various Moroccan (usually Muslim) languages.

An example almost identical to (16) appears in his dictionary as ṬLQ and the complementizer is noted as ˀan, without a suffix(Holes 2001: 34).

This finding is present in several works, butCowell (2005: 451) gives examples with and without subordinators for Syrian Arabic in this case.

This phenomenon is found elsewhere in the Near East and Classical Arabic shows frozen ˀannahu (Jérome Lentin, personal communication).

The presence of a preposition before the expletive lā is probably not exceptional, but prepositions other than ˤan are probably more frequent -I am thinking, for instance, of the preposition li in the form lylā found in Middle Arabic(Lentin 1997: 404 ff). See also li > la in Lebanon(Feghali 1938: 358, 423).

The normal (non expletive) negation in (28) would be mā.

One finds aḥsan followed by yikūn in wish exclamations with the meaning 'hoffentlich... nicht' = 'hopefully... not!'(Woidich 2006: 381).

ˤašān 'in order to' "is always used to form a control structure (known as adjunct control) [...]. In such cases, the subject of the control clause (e.g. subject pronoun) is not overtly expressed."(Leung and al. 2021: 371).

Tauzin gives another translation ('call me, I'll come and help you') which is a possible interpretation -implying a different intonation from the one we would have with the translation I give, which remains the most likely one.

When a "control verb" has a direct object (such as waˤad 'promise'), the use of the complementizer ˀənnah 'that' is preferred.

It can also be all three at once like ˀidir, yiˀdaṛ, ˀādir -auxiliary of potentiality in Cairo Arabic-which inflects and is always followed by an imperfective(Woidich 2006: 319).

Vanhove (1993: 265-6) points out that the meaning changes to 'fail to' when the negation precedes not the auxiliary but the main verb.

However, this is not an absolute rule and does not prevent the presence of auxiliaries like lâhi before the imperfective (see (82)).

On a comparable instance with the verb ˤād 'return', see mā-ˤād-š 'no longer' followed by the perfective or imperfective in Tunisian Arabic(Mion 2013: 62).

The bleaching of a verb form is relatively frequent to mark the end of an utterance, but it is often accompanied by clear freezing -and, in Ḥassāniyya, the frequent presence of the coordinator: [u] tûv/wə xlâṣ'[and] that's it!' (see[START_REF] Cohen | Le dialecte arabe ḥassānīya de Mauritanie[END_REF]: 231, Tauzin 1993: 42).

Abbreviations