The present paper sets out to introduce a MODEL of explicitation in literary translation. The paper opens with a brief review of the notion of explicitation and the way it has been treated in translation taking a LEXICAL approach. Further, our proposed MODEL will be brought forward which will encompass eleven categories of addition to the text where such additions are recoverable from the context and hence believed to pertain to explicitation. The MODEL primarily aims at providing more details than the criteria used for distinguishing explicitation in most research in this area.The examples of explicitation presented for each category are taken from English translations of modern Persian literary texts in the study. The paper may shed light on explicitation as a tendency observed in translations and its different types of occurrence and can be used in translation training courses. Moreover, the MODEL may well serve as a means to enhance self-awareness in translators helping researchers in psycholinguistic-oriented approaches to the study of translation.

The writers of this article discuss LEXICAL processing in mind. In presenting LEXICAL processing, the writers use LEXICAL Access MODEL. This MODEL is based on semantic connectionist network and its mechanism is based on interactive activation processing. With the help of some efficient features such as frequency, semantic prime and the repetition of semantic prime, on the process of LEXICAL access, the findings of this research show that this MODEL is applicable in removing LEXICAL ambiguities of homograph words.

1-Introduction There are semantically different words and structures in Persian that are identical in pronunciation except for the place of stress. These pairs which are called stress oppositions are of two types; the first type includes a LEXICAL stress opposition between two LEXICAL entries called a stress minimal pair. The second type is either the result of some phonological processes or the interaction among morphological, syntactic and phonetic factors at post-LEXICAL level. One or both sides of these stress oppositions are syntactic phrases. There are many stress oppositions in Persian; however only five of which are stress minimal pairs. Being a minimal pair is not the sole analyzable feature in these stress oppositions. There are other features which merit further consideration. The objectives of this research were to introduce and discuss features of stress minimal pairs, to introduce and classify the whole possible stress oppositions in Persian according to their LEXICAL/ syntactic categories, and to figure out whether stress shift caused semantic changes or it was the effect or consequence of different elements in stress oppositions. 2-Theoretical framework Phrase Structure Grammar (Chomsky, 1957) is the theoretical framework which was used in this research to classif post-LEXICAL structures. In this theoretical framework the structure of constituents is specified using phrase structure rules: S → VP NP NP → {Art (Adj) N, Pro, PN} VP → V NP (PP) (Adv) 3-Methodology This research aimed at introducing different LEXICAL and post-LEXICAL stress oppositions in Persian. To this end, structures other than LEXICAL entries were classified into noun/verb phrases using Phrase Structure Grammar. Accordingly, various stress oppositions might include two LEXICAL entries, a LEXICAL entry and a noun/verb phrase, two noun phrases, two verb phrases, a noun phrase and a verb phrase, as well as emphatic stress. It is noteworthy that the phonetic representation (PR) rather than the underlying representation (UR) was used to specify stress oppositions. Finally, the morphemes of stress oppositions where compared in order to specify the main reason of their semantic (or grammatical) difference. 4-Results & discussion Although Persian is so rich in terms of having stress oppositions, it only has five stress minimal pairs. The necessary condition that must be there for a stress opposition to be considered a stress minimal pair is that both its members must be LEXICAL entries. Hence, a post-LEXICAL stress opposition of which one member is the result of a phonological change, or one member or both members are a syntactic phrase is not considered a stress minimal pair. LEXICAL stress or being a stress minimal pair is not the only criterion to evaluate stress oppositions. Stress shift is regarded the main reason for meaning change if there is no other distinctive factor at work, that is, we can say stress shift has caused meaning change when both members of a stress opposition consist of identical morphemes, or one of the members is not the result of a phonological process. Otherwise, stress itself is the consequence of different morphemes or application of a phonological process. Accordingly, the findings of this research are in contrast with the studies in the literature which regarded the stress opposition between a word and a phrase as a minimal pair, or posited that the meaning difference between two unlelated words of a stress minimal pair is due to stress shift. 5-Conclusions & suggestions The significance of this paper is that it is the first research to address LEXICAL and post-LEXICAL stress oppositions in Persian and to discuss how they were created. Moreover, this paper was an attempt to reduce the uncertainty in regard to the nature and identity of stress oppositions through introducing and classifying them and using the titles “ LEXICAL and post-LEXICAL stress oppositions” to designate them. A future research suggestion could be investigating LEXICAL and post-LEXICAL stress oppositions in other languages.

The understanding and analysis of deep layers of mystical texts and particular language of mystics has been always one of the aims of scholars in the field of mysticism. Although various theories have been proposed for analyzing the texts and many works have been studied and analyzed based on such theories, employing the theories of analysis of literary texts for analyzing the language of mystics has not been always sufficient and sometimes leads to some results which are not congruent with the soul of Islamic mysticism. One of the reasons behind such incongruence is that these theories have been formed in a non-mystical sphere and do not accord with mystical rules.While explicating the ideas of mystics about form, meaning and the function of words in mystical texts, this paper aims to propose a LEXICAL MODEL for analyzing these texts and then provide an analysis of a mystical text as the application of such a MODEL. The investigation of various semantic aspects of a word and the relation of these aspects with other words in the text and explaining different kinds of intratextual and extratextual connections of words lead to drawing the interconnected semantic networks in these texts and pave the way for analyzing mystical texts in the domain of words.

Mass dynamic analysis of structures requires high computational cost which leads to time consuming process. Therefore, it is necessary to use simplified MODELs that significantly reduce the time of the analysis with appro-priate and acceptable accuracy compared to the detailed MODEL. In this research, a simplified MODEL of multi degrees of freedom for the DUAL system of moment resisting frame and shear wall with regular plan is proposed. MVLEM MODEL is used for shear wall and Substitute Frame is used for RC moment resisting frame. The MVLEM MODEL consists of axial elements that simulate the flexural behavior of the shear wall and the substi-tute frame uses one bay frame instead of multi-bay moment resisting frames. In the end, the accuracy and speed of MODELing and analysis of the simplified MODEL compared to the original MODEL as a detailed frame. The results show that the simplified MODEL provides seismic responses with less than 10% error and analysis time less than 30 times compared to the detailed MODEL.

In this research Persian affixes have been studied based on LEXICAL morphology. In this MODEL, the bases of new words are almost the words used in language. Persian affixes are grouped in two classes based on their phonological behavior to the base. One type is neutral and the other one is non-neutral. Neutral affixes which belong to stratum one, have no phonological effect on the bases they are attached to, but non-neutral ones affect it in some ways; these affixes belong to stratum 2. Most of the Persian affixes are auto-stressed; they take the stress from the base on to itself. Changing the place of the stress affects the meaning of their bases.

LEXICAL representation of Persian simple, complex, and compound words is discussed based on the view that the LEXICAL representation of a word (in the mental lexicon) is a representation termed the Basic Orthographic Syllabic Structure (BOSS). BOSS, as theorized by Taft (1975), Taft and Forster (1975, 1976), and Taft (1979), is identified based on both orthographic and morphological factors. It is argued that the BOSS, with some major modifications, may account for LEXICAL representation and LEXICAL access of Persian simple and compound words, but not for morphologically related words of Arabic origin in Persian. An altematively compatible account is then presented.

Ambiguity is one of the most important issues in LEXICAL semantics and linguistics, and it has been studied from different approaches so far. It has a very long tradition of research in the history of linguistic studies. However, this paper will open a new perspective in studying semantic LEXICAL ambiguity based on analysis of some cases in Farsi language, and as a result a new cognitive-semantic hypothesis will be introduced and discussed. Studying ambiguity with a cognitive approach may have some theoretical advantages which are not limited to Farsi language, and it could be generalized to all languages. LEXICAL ambiguity could be found when a word or lexeme presents more than one meaning at the same time by which a language user cannot easily detect the actual meaning. There are also syntactic and pragmatic ambiguities, but this research is about the semantic LEXICAL ambiguity. Some cases of LEXICAL ambiguity are homonymy words that are pronounced, and spelled similar but they are different words with different meanings. In this paper, a new hypothesis will be introduced which deals with the semantic LEXICAL ambiguity with a cognitive approach. This hypothesis will be called DUAL readings hypothesis of semantic LEXICAL ambiguity...