The Dichotomy of Declension and Prohibition: A Phonological Investigation

The present study investigates a prominent grammatical topic that has garnered considerable attention among grammarians, specifically the “prohibition of declension.” There is a widespread consensus among grammarians regarding certain words that do not undergo declension and instead function as comparative bases. The methodology employed in this study entails presenting perspectives from both ancient and contemporary grammarians on this subject. The researchers’ primary objective is to substantiate that the occurrence or absence of declension cannot be attributed to the reasons commonly posited by grammarians but can be explained by the principle of linguistic economy. This principle encompasses phonetic reduction or assimilation through phonetic analysis. By examining the data of declension cases categorically and qualitatively, the study illustrates how different syntactic contexts determine the inflection status of declension, highlighting that this phenomenon is a form of impoverishment that subjugates the Case to its morphological requirements. The study also highlights that declension involves an interface between morphology, phonology, and syntax. This interface incorporates plurality, proper nouns, and morphological sensitivity on the one hand while catering to phonological alterations of the Case-ending market based on the syntactic position of the noun. Therefore, the study contributes to understanding the syntactic impoverishment of declension of Standard Arabic, highlighting that the non-application of a normative rule within grammar is universally mirrored in other cases in different languages, including over-generalization, irregularities, and idiosyncrasy. The study also delves into supporting the principle of economy, demonstrating that declension is economically formed through choice vs. rejection of the optimal output within the syntactic context.