Optionality and minimalism: the case of direct object

Since minimalism, the latest generativist syntactic theory, assumes that the sole motivation for movement is the checking of formal features, there is no place for optionality; it is banned on the grounds that it is against economy principle, a tenet of the minimalist theory. The question that arises is how to account for the optionality observed in some Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) structures where there is optional gap-resumption alternation. . The case in point here is the case of the emergence and absence of the resumptive pronoun (RP) in direct object relatives. The observed optionality in this case, however, is missing in the case of indefinite direct object relatives where an RP attaches to the verb obligatorily. This study offers a fresh analysis of MSA optional cases relevant to direct object relatives. I will argue that the optionality observed in the case under study is not a case of true optionality and that the gap and resumption alternation observed emanates from separate numerations. Since resumption has something to add to the LF, resumption plays a ‘support’ role in avoiding ambiguity