Conditional Constructions consist of two clauses. The existence or non-existence of a causal relationship between these two clauses causes the Conditional Construction to be divided into two groups: consequential and non-consequential Conditionals. The literature review of Conditional concept shows that it can be introduced a variety of Conditional Constructions according to various criteria though sometimes the same phenomena differ in how they are named. In the present study, by reviewing the literature and based on the corpus-based approach in the Persian language, it was attempted to provide a model that covers various types of Conditional Construction according to similarities and differences in their properties. The findings showed that in addition to open, hypothetical, real, rhetorical, relevant and implicit assertion Conditional Construction, the four different types of Conditionals including contrastive, implicational contrastive, converse and reverse Conditionals can be also introduced. In the contrastive Conditional, both clauses describe some related property but differ in some values assigned to the shared property. In implicational contrastive Conditional, there is a contrast relationship between one clauses and the inference of the other one. In the converse Conditional, contrary to the basic Conditional, the "if clause” is the result of the second clause and in the reverse Conditionals both clauses simultaneously are conditioned by the other one.

Introduction: There are Conditional sentences in all languages. A Conditional sentence consists of two main and subordinate clauses that are apodosis and protasis clauses respectively. In this study, due to the importance of Conditional Constructions and the lack of typological classification of these structures in Persian language, we have studied the typology of Conditional Constructions in New Persian language. Theoretical concepts: In this study, we will examine Conditional sentences of New Persian language, based on the theoretical framework of Declerck and Reed (2001). In this semantic theoretical framework, Conditional sentences can be classified in different types according to the possible worlds of protasis clause. In this typology possible world of protasis clause can be factual or theoretical. If the possible world is theoretical, it can be neutral or non-neutral, and if it is non-neutral, it can be one of the four types of closed, open, tentative, and counterfactual. In diagram 1, this typology is shown: ...

AbstractPersian verb forms in Conditional Constructions and consequence clauses are complicated in terms of tense, modality. The various verb forms can be problematic in teaching Persian to foreign language learners in understanding and using them. Although there are lists of possible types of Conditional Constructions of Persian, it seems that none of them provides an exhaustive list of all variations. Therefore, the objective of this research was to provide a more comprehensive classification of TMA (tense-mood-aspect) of verb forms in Conditional Constructions from a corpus of about 400 compound Conditional sentences collected from a vast number of sentences of dialogues and other spoken discourses, chat communications, and contemporary written texts. After investigating and classifying various manifestations of verb forms in both Conditional and consequence clauses, it was turned out that there are 10 verb forms in Conditional clauses forming 44+4 types of Conditional Constructions, and 10 verb forms in consequence clauses forming 44+4 types of Conditional Constructions: 44 different combinations of Conditional and consequence clauses, and 4 types conditions with just Conditional clause Therefore, new uses of verb forms in Persian Conditional Constructions were found.Keywords: Conditional; verb form; grammatical structure; Persian language Introduction Expressing condition is one of the important features of language that allows the creation of a possible world that doesn't yet exist, or can exist, or could exist but is no longer possible. The condition is widely discussed in grammar books. However, it seems that in most of the resources in Persian grammar, the categorization of the grammatical Construction of verb forms in both clauses of condition and consequence doesn't take all of the parameters into account. For example, in some of the Persian resources such as Jafari (2010), Lazard (1992), Mahootian (1997), and Natel Khanlari (1976), it's mentioned that if the verb form in Conditional clause is past subjunctive, the verb form in consequence clause might be past subjunctive, or there is no consequence, or consequence clause without any verb.To study all the possible combinations of condition and consequence clauses in Persian, we examined verb forms of Conditionals in Persian language varieties including colloquial language, chat communication, and contemporary written text in a corpus of about 400 Conditional Constructions out of more than 10,000 sentences. At the end, types of verb forms in terms of TAM and also possible combinations of Conditional Constructions were found and categorized. To do this, at first, the categorization of Declerck (2001) was used for the preliminary classification of the grammatical structure of Persian Conditional sentences. Declerck (2001) refers to four absolute tenses which locate the time of situation in the past, pre-present (present perfect), present or post present (future).Due to the fact that Persian grammar books and research related to this project usually don't address verb forms in Conditional Constructions completely and comprehensively, this research aims to provide a categorization of verb forms in terms of TAM in Persian Conditional Construction.     Material and MethodsAs mentioned before, the corpus of the study consists of 400 Conditional Constructions out of more than 10,000 sentences collected from dialogues, chats and contemporary written texts. After examining the Conditional Construction taken from the collected corpus, according to the literature review and the model introduced by Declerck (2001), two categories were presented: 1- condition based on the verb forms of Conditional clauses, 2- condition based on the verb forms of consequence clauses.Out of 400 extracted Conditional sentences, 10 different grammatical Constructions were found for the verb forms in the Conditional clause as follows:  1- simple present, 2- progressive present, 3- present perfect, 4- progressive present perfect, 5- subjunctive present, 6- past, 7- progressive past, 8- past perfect, 9- subjunctive past, and 10- progressive past. Totally, with these 10 grammatical Constructions in the Conditional clause, 44+4 types of Conditional Constructions with different grammatical Constructions have been found in the consequential clause. S for the verb forms in consequence clauses, 10 verb forms were formed. All possible combinatins found are presented in table 1. Table 1- Classification of Conditionals based on tense in Conditional clause FrequencyVerb form in consequence clauseVerb form in Conditional clauseNumber26Simple presentSimple Present11Present perfect37Subjunctive present2Subjunctive past24Imperative: positive and negative2past1Simple presentProgressive Present26Simple presentPresent perfect 36Present perfect5Subjunctive present3Imperative1Past1Simple past1Future1Progressive present perfectProgressive present perfect482Simple presentSubjunctive present55Present perfect19Subjunctive present7Future2Imperative13Simple PresentSubjunctive past63Future3Subjunctive present1Progressive present1Past1Imperative32Simple PresentPast71Present perfect18Subjunctive present3Subjunctive past6Simple past5Progressive past10Imperative: positive & negative2Future1Progressive past perfectProgressive past83Past 6Progressive past 2Simple PastsPast perfect91Past1Subjunctive present2Imperative1PastPast progressive101Imperative1Present perfect  Discussion of Results and ConclusionsThe aforementioned classification showed that the number of verb forms in condition and consequence clauses is much more than what was previously stated in Persian grammar books. For example, in Persian grammar for tense and modality in possible conditions, only the patterns of "past progressive + past progressive" and "past perfect + past progressive/ past perfect" were mentioned. While this study showed that other verb forms in terms of tense are possible in both condition and sequence clauses such as progressive past + simple past, progressive past + progressive present perfect. Also, for impossible conditions, in addition to the pattern of past perfect + past perfect/ progressive past, more cases were found, including past perfect + past and past perfect + subjunctive present.Other patterns that were observed in the data of this research are Conditional Construction without consequence, consequence without a verb, and use of question words instead of a consequence as the following examples:1- Bale, dust-è     aziz.    Agar dar kelāshā šerkat    karde   bāšid-ò         nām-etun dar list bāše.    Yes,  friend-ezāfe  dear.  If     at    classes  attendance  made subjunctive-and   name-your at list  be-subjunctive-3rd.As it has illustrated in example 1, the speaker refrains from repeating the consequence in the Conditional Construction for brevity, or simply because the concept of the consequence is clear to the audience.  Yes dear friend. If you would have attended classes and your name be on the list".2- Age bege,    ci?      If     say+s/he,  what?               What If s/he says?Here, question word is used instead of a consequence calause.Moreover, in the corpus of this research, for the first time, verb forms were found in which their tense weren fake rather than real, such as past tense instead of future tense. Also, we showed that it's not always a main verb that determines grammatical Constructions in Persian Conditionals. The reason might be the fact that in some cases it is a modal verb that determines the grammatical Construction in condition and consequence clauses. To conclude, Persian Conditionals were divided into four categorise based on grammatical structure: past, pre-present, present, and post-present.

In addition to the main Construction of oath in which one swears to someone or something, it has another form in Persian language. This kind of oath is a Conditional Construction which, at its first part, is provided with the subject of oath and at the second part, with the act of oath. In this paper, using the "speech act" theory in John Austin's point of view as a theoretical basis and by mentioning examples of literary works as well as examples of slang register, we will specify the Conditional Construction of oath. The results of the present research show that the form of Conditional oath, in comparison with the main form, bears more emphasis and thus is further used in occasions that the addresser tends to emphasize on the subject. 1. Introduction Oath in Persian has always had a special syntactic Construction that has changed over time. The basic complete Construction of swearing consists of the following components: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) In this Construction, the ‘noun’ is what is sworn by. The ‘sentence’ is subject of the oath, i. e. what the oath is taken for, such as: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I swear by the dust of your feet that I wish to die at your feet’ Apart from the main form mentioned above, the expression of an oath in Persian represents another form through a Conditional Construction. In a Conditional swearing, the subject of the oath (i. e. what the oath is taken for) is stated in the dependent clause, and the act of swearing (i. e. what the oath is taken by) is included in the main clause. 2. Theoretical Framework John Austin’s theory of “speech acts” suggests that, in the human language system, the speech inherently represents the performance of an act. In other words, the expression of words in itself is the doing of the action. Austin calls such speech ‘speech act’, i. e. the speech that carries an action. He argues that when a speaker utters a sentence, three levels of speech acts occur simultaneously: Locutionary act, Illocutionary act, and Perlocutionary act. Locutionary act is the meaningful phrases and sentences that are expressed. In illocutionary act, the speaker expresses phrases and sentences to encode a specific meaning. In the perlocutionary act, the speaker influences the audience through the speech. Austin divides the second speech act, i. e. illocutionary act, into five categories: 1. Verdictive: Acts that emphasize the speaker’s commitment to the truth of a proposition, such as ‘express’ and ‘estimate’ verbs. 2. Exercitive: Acts that indicate the exercise of power, right, sovereignty, will and influence and are expressed through such verbs as ‘choose’, ‘advise’, ‘order’, ‘appoint’ and ‘plead’. 3. Commissive: Acts that indicate the speaker’s commitment to do something and, by expressing them, the speaker obliges oneself to do things. The verbs ‘promise’, ‘commit’ and ‘swear’ fall into this category. 4. Behabitive: Acts that show the types of social behaviors of language speakers, such as the verbs‘apologize’, ‘thank’, ‘sympathize’, ‘insult’, ‘humiliate’, etc. 5. Expositive: Acts that deal with how words are used in language and describe how speech is organized in the conversational process. This type of act includes the following verbs: ‘Argue’, ‘answer’, ‘assume’, ‘accept’ and ‘explain’. Taking of an oath or oath, which is the subject of this inquiry, belongs to the category of commissive acts in which the speaker takes an oath to express their commitment to an issue. Thus, from the point of view of the theory of speech acts, ‘swearing’ is an act that the speaker does with speech. The pragmatics and semantics of the syntactic Construction in question confirm that although the form of speech is Conditional, it is used for a certain act, which is the expression of an oath. 3. Methodology In this article, the nature and the status of the Conditional Construction of oath is examined with examples of classical and contemporary Persian literary works. To do this, with a comprehensive plan and a practical approach, we will examine the Conditional Construction of oath to understand how the components of this syntactic Construction may change to encode a different meaning at different tenses and for first-person, second-person and third-person forms. 4. Results and Discussion What is needed to know about this type of oath is to answer the following two questions: 1-What is its syntactic form and what are its components? 2-How does each of the syntactic components of this type of swearing change, and in what ways can it be plotted? In other words, in different practical situations, what structural changes might occur in Conditional oath Constructions to produce different forms of this type of oath? The nature of the Conditional type of oath is best revealed when comparing the following examples, which expresses the same subject in both types of oath: The common Construction of swearing: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I swear by my life that I will not break my covenant’ Conditional swearing: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘Broken be my back and my soul! If I break my covenant’ The meaning of both sentences is the same, but the way they are expressed is syntactically different. In the Conditional Construction, the speaker considers breaking the covenant as a curse upon themselves to show that they do not break the covenant. In this syntactic Construction of swearing, the dependent clause in which the subject of the oath is raised is not limited in terms of tense: it is used for any subject in all three present, past and future tenses: Present: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘May I be a base-born if I have any other mistake than this’ Past: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘May my poetry be ill-gotten if I had written only a poem in my life except with the echo of your name’ Future: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I would be worse than a dog if I run after bread/sustenance like a dog’ The main clause can be expressed in three forms: ‘declarative’, ‘imperative’ and ‘exclamatory’, each of which can be converted into other forms. The possibility of converting these forms into one another form implies that the speaker feels free to express a story with three different Constructions according to the situation: Main clause in the form of a declarative sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I am ignoble if I go with a complain to a stranger’ Main clause in the form of an exclamatory sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘If I have been contaminated by the wine so far, may God’s lawful be unlawful to me! ’ Main clause in the form of an imperative sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘If this deed of mine is not true, make me die a Jew God’ Although the expression of an oath through the Conditional Construction is possible in all three grammatical persons, i. e. first, second and third person, in both ‘singular’ and ‘plural’ forms, it is widely used in the first person (singular and plural) and its meaning is clearer in this form. This type of oath is rarely used in the second or third persons, and its meaning is not very clear: First person singular: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘My house may be ruined if I have said such a thing’ First person plural: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘We are not human if we relinquish our right’ 5. Conclusion and Suggestions The present paper illustrated that oath in Persian is not limited to the major common Construction rather it has long been encoded through Conditionals on special occasions. The Conditional Construction of swearing in Persian is used for any subject in all three tenses of the past, present, and future, with slight differences in the first-, second-and third-person forms. The main clause in this type of oath expression is always in negative form and can be expressed in declarative, imperative, or exclamatory forms. Rhetorically, this type of oath is used widely in situations where the speaker emphasizes the subject in question and tends to reassure the audience about the subject by removing any doubts. Uncommon abbreviations: SUBJ = subjunctive, DECL = declarative, EXCL = exclamatory, IMPE = imperative, PRS = present, PST = past, FUT = future, PL = plural, SG = single. Select Bibliography Akhavan Sales, M. 1995. Three Books. Tehran: Winter. [in Persian] Stroll, A. 2013. Analytical Philosophy in the Twentieth Century. Translated by Fereydoun Fatemi. Tehran: Markaz. [in Persian] Aminpour, Q. 2009. Mirrors Suddenly. Tehran: Ofogh. [in Persian] Hafez, Sh. 1983. Poetical Works. Edited by Parviz Natel Khanlari. Vol. 1. Tehran: Kharazmi. [in Persian] Khaqani, A. 1994. Poetical Works of Khaqani. Edited by Ziaeddin Sajadi. Tehran: Zavar. [in Persian] Searle, J. 2008. Speech Acts. Translated by Mohammad Ali Abdollahi. Qom: Research Institute of Islamic Sciences and Culture. [in Persian] Saadi, M. 2015. Saadi Sonnets. Edited by Gholam hossein Yousefi. Tehran: Sokhan. [in Persian] Sheikh Baha’ie, M. 2003. Collected Poems. Introduction by Saeed Nafisi. Tehran: Zarrin. [in Persian] Mawlawi, J. 1984. The Works of Shams of Tabriz. Edited by Badiozzaman Forouzanfar. Tehran: Amir Kabir. [in Persian] Nizami, I. 2007. Sharafnameh. Edited by Behrouz Servatian. Vol. 1. Tehran: Amir Kabir. [in Persian]

Conditional sentence is a compound sentence consisting of two clauses: protasis and apodosis. The purpose of this paper is investigating the Conditional sentences in contemporary Persian language based on the Declerck and Reed typology (2001). According to this semantic typology, possible world of protasis is divided in to two factual and theoretical classes. Theoretical possible world can be neutral or nonneutral and the nonneutral is divided in to four types: closed, open, tentative and counterfactual. In the present study, we try to examine these types with respect to the corpus of 286 Conditional sentences extracted from ten contemporary story books and the frequency of occurrence of each one to be determined separately. The analysis of Persian Conditional sentences shows that the Persian Conditional Construction is compatible with mentioned typology and open possible world has the highest occurrence frequency, and the neutral, closed, factual, tentative and counterfactual possible worlds respectively dedicated the highest frequency of the open possible world. The higher frequency of occurrence of the open possible world arises from the fact that in this possible world a probabilistic situation is considered and there is no certainty about its occurrence and this interpretation is most consistent with the operation of the Conditional Construction. This study also shows that in addition to the common Conditional conjunctions such as “ agar, be shartike, vaella, vagarna, . . . ” other conjunctions are also used as Conditional conjunctions like: “ valo, farzan, hamin ke, be mojarade inke, vaghti, cheo… che, hala ke, ta, ke … . ” .

Purpose: The future of the Construction industry is increasingly influenced by new technologies. In order to adopt appropriate strategies in facing new technologies, it is necessary to know the possible futures of the Construction industry. This research was done with the aim of explaining the technological uncertainties and compiling the future scenarios of the Construction industry.  Method: The research method is applied and was carried out with a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. First, the library study was used to determine the technological drivers, then the Structural Analysis was used to explain the technological uncertainties, and finally, the Schwartz method was used to compile the scenarios. The statistical population is experts of Construction industry. Findings: Nine technological uncertainties affecting the future of the Construction industry have been identified and for each of them, three states of decline, stagnation and progress have been considered. Data analysis by Scenario Wizard shows eight probable scenarios. The portfolio of scenarios including four groups of progress scenarios, towards progress, towards stagnation, and towards wane has been compiled. Conclusion: In the progress scenario, the 89% of uncertainties have developed. In  towards progress, 56% of the factors are in the development status, which indicates the development of the technological factor application. In the stagnation scenario, no progress has been made in the application of uncertainties and they are in a static state. In towards wane, uncertainties have been placed in a situation of reduced use.

Background: The expansion of the use of audio and video media technology has faced society with many medical, cultural and economic challenges. In the meantime, excessive use of mobile phones can cause many problems. Objective: The aim of this study was to construct and validate a questionnaire on physical and psychological injuries of mobile phones. Method: The method of the present study was descriptive-correlational and confirmatory factor analysis. The statistical population of the study consisted of all citizens of Khorramabad with a diploma or higher in 1399, which was selected as a statistical sample by available sampling method of 200 people online and virtual. Results: The results showed that the factorized physical and psychological harm questionnaire of cell phone with 42 questions and 10 components (fear of loss, vibration syndrome, duck syndrome, nomophobia, insomnia, hearing problem, eye syndrome, tunnel and neck syndrome SMS) and has good reliability, validity and flexibility in terms of psychometrics. Discussion and Conclusion: The questionnaire of factor analysis of physical and psychological injuries of mobile phones can be used to identify and study the physical and psychological injuries of mobile phones.

The purpose of this paper is investigating the Conditional connective words in New Persian language based on the Declerck and Reed typology (2001). According to this semantic typology, different types of Conditional sentences based on possible worlds of protasis are factual, neutral, closed, open, tentative and counterfactual. In the canonical Conditional sentence there is one connective word in the beginning of the sentence that is used to mark Conditionality. In the present study, we try to examine these types with respect to the corpus of 3648 Conditional sentences extracted from 110 books of 4th to 14th AH centuries. In New Persian various connective words have been used as Conditional words like: “ agar, agarche, agarna, ta, ke, valo, farzan, haminke, darsuratike, vaella, hargah, chon, … ” . Statistical calculations on Conditional words with a frequency above fifty show that there are certain tendencies between different Conditional possible worlds and types of Conditional words.

Contingency fee is one of the common institutions of common law legal system particularly in the united state. In this type of fees, the payment of fee is Conditional to the results of lawsuit. So if the lawsuit fails, no fee would be paid to the lawyer and if the lawsuit is successful, more than usual amount or a pecent of condemned amount will be paid. Despite accepting theses agreement in some legal systems, there are some limitations in order to make conformity with their own legal system which make different, the importance and functions of it in compare with the U. S. In some legal systems, other institutions with the same function are predicted too. In Iran legal system, despite of freedom of contract, according to article 80 of the law of attorney regulations, a type of contingency fees which is a part of a demand are prohibited. This paper with a comparative attitude and with insisting on U. S legal system and clarifiying the Conditional and contingency fees and its advantages and disadvantages, defend the accepting of it in Iran legal system.