Previous studies have focused mostly on the syntactic features of the linking particle (Ezafe) in simple NOUN phrases with little attention paid to its semantic representations and functions specifically within the context of DEVERBAL NOUN phrases. The present study aims to analyze semantic functions of the linking particle as it appears between a DEVERBAL NOUN and its various modifiers, and compare them with their corresponding elements in sentences in a Distributed Morphology framework (DM) in Hawrami. This study shows this ancient linker's trace in most Kurdish dialects exhibits agentive semantic functions in addition to expressing possession and modification. Furthermore, the subject of unaccusative verbs at the sentential level is realized as the patient/possessor or as the theme/possessor of their corresponding DEVERBAL NOUN phrases. However, the subject of unergative verbs assumes the agentive/possessor role in their corresponding NOUN phrases. Moreover, the object of transitive and ditransitive verbs is represented as a patient or theme, and also as a possessed entity before the subject is realized as the possessor in the corresponding DEVERBAL NOUN phrases. Results indicate that the representation of both sentences and their corresponding DEVERBAL NOUN phrases within DM framework provides stronger support for a syntactic movement account of DEVERBAL NOUN phrases, their semantic functions, and properties in Hawrami.

The aim of this study is to investigate the argument structure of DEVERBAL NOUNs in Persian on the basis of Lexical Functional Grammar and to describe how the semantic roles of a verb can be represented in constituent structure of the equivalent DEVERBAL NOUN. Data analyzes indicate that Mapping Principles in Lexical Functional Grammar can properly determine that in Persian the agent in transitive DEVERBAL NOUN is realized as oblique and in intransitive DEVERBAL NOUN as postnominal possessor. Whereas the semantic roles of patient and theme in transitive DEVERBAL NOUN are realized as possessor. According to Mapping Principles the semantic role of agent in NOUNs which are derived from passive construction can be realized as oblique in constituent structure.

In this article, the NOUN-NOUN compounds collected from the Mo’in dictionary are investigated and 11 basic semantic functions (classes) are determined for them. The theoretical framework of this study is conceptual semantics (the semantic theory of the parallel architecture of grammar). In order to identify the semantic structure of these compounds, we should determine the semantic relationship between two NOUNs and find the semantic head of the compound. In this analysis, one NOUN can be an argument of the other NOUN or both of NOUNs can be an argument of another semantic function. This semantic function can be copied from the lexical entry of one NOUN or be one of basic semantic functions. In more complex situations, basic semantic functions can combine with each other. Therefore, a generative system is shaped, which can produce unlimited semantic relations between two NOUNs.

NOUN Incorporation (NI) is argued to result from head movement in which the head of an object NOUN Phrase moves into the verb creating a Complex Verb (CV) or from word formation rules applying in the lexicon. This paper, argues that NT and CV are not unrelated processes, but points on the same continuum. The paper also argues that neither Baker's (1988) syntactic approach nor Rosen's (1989) lexical approach which does not pay enough attention to semantic and pragmatic aspects of the process can account for NI in Persian. The study indicates that incorporation in Persian is of various types, such as N+V , V + Compound V, N+PP+V, N+PP+ CV and PP+ V.

For many centuries the linguists have almost always studied morphology. But with the advent of Transformational Grammar , syntactic studies and the structure of sentences have earned maximum importance, therefore Sentence was the focus of study until 70s , and from then on , little by little linguists have begun to study the structure of NP, and they have found many similarities between NPs , VPs and sentences . The idea of this similarity has led to many comparative studies. The Empty Category is one of the arguments discussed in sentence structure and pro /PRO is one of these empty categories. This article intends to indicate the existence of pro/PRO in NPs . Comparing Persian and Italian languages we find the same control properties in sentences.

Clausal dependents of NOUN in Persian are divided into two groups: relative clauses (restrictive relative clause /RRC and non-restrictive relative clause /NRRC), and clausal complements of NOUN (CCN). By mentioning the semantic and syntactic differences between these two groups, Iranian researchers often consider them as independent and distinct clauses. In this study, we show that the so-called CCN is a kind of RC and for some reason they cannot be complements. First, like RCs, these clauses are optional and adjunctive. Second, those few NOUNs that can accept a clausal dependent, unlike their corresponding verbs, do not semantically indicate an event or process or action. Third, the behavior of these clauses happens to be remarkably similar to that of NRRCs, mainly because the head nominal in both clauses are definite. The necessity of definiteness arises from the information structure of the clause and its being discourse-bound. On the other hand, contrary to what has been described in the literature, the head N of the clauses is not necessarily a predicative NOUN; however, semantically it necessarily does contain an event descriptor. That is why not every NOUN can be the head N of these clauses. The seeming CCNs are in fact RCs that are the product of relativization of an event argument. Since this element is hidden and located in one of the functional projections, CCNs seem to have no gap/resumptive proNOUN. Thus, it is better to use the term “ event-relative clauses” to refer to these clauses. The syntactic analysis of these clauses – in a manner similar to the syntactic analysis of RCs– will justify the impossibility of extraction, because according to Phase Theory, CP and DP are the phases that the extracted item must first move to their edges; However, the specifier of these two phrases is filled in by the relative operator and the DP, and no element can be extracted from it.

NOUN Incorporation is one of the productive processes of word formation in Languages especially in Persian. This Process is based on incorporating a nominal head -No- (mainly internal argument) with a lexically verbal head -Vo- and its output is an intransitive incorporate verb. Satisfied with its argument structure, This output itself can act as a base stem for other derivations. Usually, there are two approaches in accounting for NOUN Incorporation. One approach is based on a syntactic movement of a NOUN toward a verb and then their incorporation as Baker (1988) suggests. The other approach is morphological one which is on the basis of the selection of a NOUN stem and a verb stem from the lexicon, and then their compounding gives an intransitive incorporate verb, In this article, it has been clarified that morphological approach can account for this process better than syntactic one, because it can increase the degree of productivity and generality in word formation.

The Infinitive NOUN is one of the types of names in the Arabic and Persian languages, which is different from the Infinitive sometimes. . . The most important new results of the research can be summarized in: that the Persian language has more diverse ways to formulate the Infinitive NOUN of the Arabic language; In Arabic and its semantic effect is most often used in non-source and non-issuer use, while the Infinitive NOUN in Persian is due to the large number of its forms. This may lead to the meaning of the Infinitive. The meaning of the name may be descriptive and maybe in two different contexts. Although there is a difference in the meaning of the subject of derivation in Arabic and Persian, but the Infinitive NOUN in Arabic is not one of the eight known derivatives, although it has a root and weight, and in Persian is a derivative name. The Infinitive NOUN is rarely used in Arabic in the sense of the Infinitive, and it is rarely used in its work. However, there is a common point for the Infinitive NOUN in both languages. The Infinitive NOUN in both languages gets subject and object by additional structure if it has meaning and significance.