Journal of Language Research
Year:2022 | Volume:12 | Issue:2|Papers Count:6

There is a group of verbs in Persian which lost part of their semantic content in the process of language evolution. These so-called light verbs in addition with a preverbal element, a noun, an adjective or a prepositional phrase form light verb constructions in this language. The syntactic and semantic study of these constructions became one of the challenging issues in modern linguistics and they were the subject of linguistic studies in different languages from different points of view. Light verb constructions are one of the most productive constructions in Persian, but the degree of the productivity is not the same in all Persian light verbs. Why do they show different degrees of productivity in forming light verb constructions is an important question which was unaddressed by the previous scholars of the field? To answer this question, firstly we measure the productivity of each verb using the corpus data and then in the light of Distributed Morphology (Halle & Marantz, 1993; Marantz, 2013), which is a neo-constructionist view, we account for the differences in the degrees of their productivity. The results indicate that the degrees of Persian light verbs’ productivity depend on the degrees of their semantic lightness, their insertion possibilities and their insertion blockings. We assessed the degrees of their semantic lightness by comparing the light and the lexical forms of each verb in the corpus data. Using the secondary exponence of Harley and Noyer (2000), we calculated the semantic and syntactic insertion possibilities of the verbs, which means the syntactic and semantic environments in which these verbs are allowed to be inserted and finally we calculated the semantic and syntactic blockings of each verb, that is the semantic and syntactic environments in which their insertion is blocked. Thus, the verbs which contain higher degrees of lightness, more syntactic and semantic insertion possibilities and less insertion blockings display higher degrees of productivity.

Rhythmic characteristics of speech based on consonantal and vocalic intervals as well as syllabic intervals vary between speakers of the same language. Nonetheless, the rhythmicity of a speech signal is not solely dependent on the durational variability of phonetic intervals but it is also associated with the variability of the intensity patterns as well. Acoustic parameter of intensity is largely determined by the articulatory behaviors of the speech organs such as lip movement or mouth aperture. Therefore, it is plausible that speaker idiosyncrasy in movement of speech articulators and anatomical differences in individual’ s vocal tracts may influence the energy distribution across a speech signal which subsequently leads to the variability in the values of the intensity measures. Using experimental phonetics tools and from an explicitly speaker-specific perspective, the present research attempts to explore potential speaker-specific acoustic parameters of speech rhythm which are extracted from the intensity contours across Persian speakers. This research aims to discover whether intensity-based measures of speech rhythm are able to discriminate between speakers in Persian. Two types of acoustic rhythmic measures based on the mean syllable intensity (stdevM, varcoM, rPVIm, nPVIm) and peak syllable intensity (stdevP, varcoP, rPVIp, nPVIp)) were selected for this study. Speech data from 12 Persian male speakers were recorded non-contemporaneously in laboratory environment on two different occasions separated by one to two weeks. Speech tokens were acoustically measured with PRAAT version 5. 2. 34 and statistical analyses were carried out with SPSS version 21 and R version 3. 3. 3. Results of the study indicated that speech rhythm measures based on intensity fluctuations play an important role in between-speaker rhythmic variability. In addition, discriminatory power of intensity-based measures is not affected by the language-dependent characteristics of Persian. The results also showed that the peak syllable intensity measures carry more speaker-specific information compared to the mean syllable intensity measures.

Historical linguistic studies on words lead to finding clitics. Clitics function like independent words but they are phonologically dependent and in order to be pronounced they attach neighboring elements. Clitics attachment to their hosts can appear in different forms: proclitic, mesoclitic, endoclitics and enclitic. They are very important because clitics are where morphology, syntax, and phonology meet. Mukri Kurdish clitics which are highly mobile can be hosted by different categories including prepositions. Two groups of adpositions are found in Mukri which appear as both preposition and postposition. MacKenzie recognizes two kinds of prepositions in Mukri: simple prepositions and absolute forms. The prepositions of the first group occur immediately before a noun (or a noun phrase) and a pronoun which they govern, while the absolute forms which are fewer in number cannot occur before an independent noun, a noun phrase or an independent pronoun and can take only clitics as their complements. Besides the aforementioned ones compound prepositions and circumpositions are also found in Mukri. Circumpositions can be both simple and complex. Simple circumpositions can take only nominal complements but the complex circumpositions can take both clitics and full forms as their complements. The present article tries to investigate the interaction of different kinds of Mukri adpositons with pronominal clitics using Optimality Theory constraints in Prepositional Phrase (PP). The constraints which play role in clitic placement within PP are NonInitial (cli, PP), Integrity (PP) and LeftMost (cli, L, PP). Data analysis against Optimality Theory constraints showed that constraints NonInitial (cli, PP) and Integrity (PP) dominate LeftMost (cli, L, PP). Finall it was concluded that Mukri Kurdish pronominal clitics place in the second position. The research method of this article is descriptive – analytic and fieldwork. To collect the data the main author’ s intuition as the native speaker of the dialect under the discussion, 20 hours recorded speech, Mukri Kurdish sites and newspapers have been used.

This paper investigates the External Merge position of the floating quantifier “ hame” (all) in Persian. Quantifier floating has received two major analyses: stranding adverbial. In this paper, the former approach is shown to be more explanatorily justified. The paper provides evidence to indicate that “ hame” is adjoined acyclically to the argument DP after the DP moves from its θ-position, along the lines of Boskovic (2004). More specifically, quantifier floating is shown not to be possible from θ-positions. The evidence comes from the prosodic pattern of Persian unmarked sentences as well as the scope interaction of negation and the floating quantifier “ hame” . In regard to prosodic pattern of Persian unmarked sentences, main sentence stress has been argued by Kahnemuyipour (2009) to mark the left edge of vP. Floating quantifier is shown to occur before the element bearing main sentence stress in unmarked sentences, so it is claimed to be outside of vP, and therefore outside of the θ-position. As regards the second evidence, i. e. scope interaction, in negative sentences containing floating “ hame’ when negation is not focused, ‘ hame’ is constantly out of the scope of negation, and this means that in such sentences, neither the floating quantifier nor its copies are within the ccommanding domain of NegP. To put it another way, the base position of the floating quantifier is higher than NegP, which is argued to be between TP and vP. To determine the position of NegP in Persian, evidence is provided from negation in gerund phrases in Persian, and the scope interaction between manner and speaker-oriented adverbs on the one hand and between these adverbs and negation on the other. Showing that NegP is located between vP and TP within the scope of “ hame” , it is concluded that the External Merge position of quantifier is higher than vP, and therefore is outside the θ-domain.

In Persian, much research focuses on the syntax-morphology interface in DM, but research on the syntax-semantics interface is generally absent from DM literature. The aim of this study is to account for possessor raising and figure raising constructions in Persian which demands the review of the distinction between possessor and figure as thematic roles in double object and ditransitive constructions based on Wood and Marantz (2017). By the former, we mean the double object and to-dative expression of transfer of possession and by the latter, we mean ditransitive predicates that select for a locatume argument and a location argument. They involve one structure, varying in terms of what vP takes as a complement, which is a D*P in double object and a p*P in ditransitive constructions. The DP is interpreted as “ possessor” if it is externally merged in Spec of D*P and the DP is interpreted as “ figure” if it is externally merged in Spec of p*P. Possessor raising generates two other kinds of thematic dependencies, including clausal possession and change-of-state vPs. Figure raising requires the considerations of natural reflexive vPs in ditransitive constructions and their corresponding inchoatives. The interpretation of an external argument depends on a theta-role introduced somewhere lower in the structure. Figure raising involves an external argument that bears a figure role introduced inside a lower pP; clausal possession involves an external or applied argument bearing a possessor role introduced inside a lower DP. This also requires the consideration of change-of-state semantics. The basic structure of a change-of-state vPs involves one v head which takes a DP complement. Possessor raising construction combines properties of both clausal possession and change-of-state semantics.

Discourse marker is a functional-pragmatic category, not affecting truth conditions of the sentence. These linguistic elements encode procedural rather than representative or propositional meanings. Discourse markers have been the subject of increasing attention in recent years, and have been investigated in different theoretical frameworks. Among the vast variety of approaches toward interpreting the role of discourse markers, one major approach is rooted in Grice's suggestion. By elaborating the concept of conventional implicature along the previously well-known concept of conversational implicature, Grice (1989) treats some discourse markers as being instances of the former. He also conceptualized the concept of non-central or higher-level speech acts to account for the contribution of these discourse markers to the meaning of their host sentence. In this article, we will initially describe the characteristics of the discourse marker "mæ gæ r" (‘ unless’ /’ but’ ) in terms of prototypical characteristics of discourse markers proposed by Brinton (1996) and Heine (2013). We then present a diachronic exposition of its semantic development from having a propositional meaning to a word with a textual and expressive function in contemporary Persian. This explanation is in accordance with Traugott’ s (1982) analysis of semantic change toward more subjectification. Ultimately, we have applied a Gricean interpretation to this Persian discourse marker, as a higher-level speech act. It is argued that "mæ gæ r" (‘ unless’ /’ but), in addition to its function as a connective element (which connects two textual units or encrypts the connection between the propositional content of an utterance and its previous context), can help with the performance of a noncentral speech act with the illocutionary force of indicating opposition. Given the fact that speech acts, in Searl's terms, are the subject of the quadruple felicity conditions, namely Preparatory, Sincerity, Propositional content and Essential conditions we have shown how these conditions can be actualized (or applied) when it comes to higher-level speech acts.