Consider the following sentence:
その大臣は政治家にあるまじき発言で、辞任に追い込まれた。
I would like to know in particular how the section in bold should be parsed. For example:
- Since まじき is the attributive form of まじ, does まじき bind to 発言?
- eg: 政治家にある[まじき発言]
- Alternatively, does ある bind to まじき first?
- eg: 政治家に[[あるまじき]発言]
- Or is it that the whole left side be attached together?
- eg: [政治家にあるまじき]発言
- And if so, is it [政治家にある]まじき, or 政治家に[あるまじき]? Or...?
My bet right now is on 政治家に[あるまじき], since まじ is an auxiliary verb. In this case, it is an auxiliary for ある, therefore I think that まじき makes あるまじき an attributive form as a whole. However, I'm not sure what exact role に plays in this interpretation.