Possession is a universal concept. It can be syntactically represented as one of the two major varieties: Attributive or Predicative. Attributive possession is encoded as a noun phrase containing the possessor and the possesee, while predicative possession is encoded as a sentence. In the present study, predicative possession construction in Rashti Gilaki was investigated with a cognitive approach. Both primary and secondary data were used in this study. A total of 420 sentences were gathered via native Gilaki speakers, all of which verified by other native speakers of the same variety, as well as the data already created in Rastorgueva et. al. (2012). The theoretical framework of the present study is Stassen (2009) in which four major categories are introduced for encoding predicative possession including Locational, With-possessive, Topic possessive and "Have" possessive. The existence of the Locational variety, as well as With-possessives and "Have" possessives were confirmed, while no evidence for the existence of Topic possessives could be found. "Have" possessives occurred more frequently than the other two varieties, making up the overall majority of the data. As a result, it can be considered the main strategy for encoding predicative possession in the Rasht variety of Gilaki.

1. Introduction: Possession is one of the universals in linguistics; it can be encoded in nominative and predicative forms. Stassen (2009) proposed four types of predicative possession: locative possession, ‘ with’ possession, topic possession and 'have' possession. Present article studies predicative possession construction in Shahmirzadi language based on typological-functional approach; it tries to answer this question: “ which types of predicative possession strategies are used in Shahmirzadi language? A questionnaire was prepared for this survey and data was gathered by interviewing native speakers of Shahmirzadi. The questionnaire contains 53 sentences which are positive and includes predicative possessions with “ be” and “ have” . Types of predicative possession in Shahmirzadi As mentioned previously, Stassen (2009) proposed four types of predicative possession: 1-Locative possession: At/ to PR (there) is/exist a PE 2-“ with” possession: PR is/exist with a PE 3-Topic possession: (As for) PR, PE is/exist 4-“ have” possession: PR has a PE Analysis of the collected data and examination of Stassen’ s proposed classification pertaining to predicative possession, indicate that Shahmirzadi language chooses three types of predicative possession construction which are provided in theoretical framework of the article; there is no topic possession in Shahmirzadi language and according to the statistical analysis of the results, the speakers tend to use ‘ have’ possession more than locative and ‘ with’ possession, therefore the frequency of 'have' possession is more than other types. Some data in Shahmirzadi possession predicative are as follows: Table 1-Shahmirzadi data Types of predicative possession Shahmirzadi English Locative ʔ æ me xune dæ læ yæ k xü rde ʔ ö taq dæ ræ We have a small room in our house. With yæ k piremæ rd dæ ræ ba sæ fə d-ə mi ö dæ raz-e riš The old man has white hair and long beard. Topic -- have ʔ in š æ hr č æ n-ta mæ drə sə dan-æ This city has some schools. Conclusion and discussion Having studied different aspects of examples and data in corpus, we came up with the following results: 1-Locative possession is used in Shahmirzadi language but the speakers tend to convert locative possession to “ have” possession. They convert 84% of locative possession data to “ have” possession. The Possessee is the subject of the sentence and the possessor is oblique. The oblique case is shown by the postposition in this language. 2-Although the frequency of “ with” possession in this language is very low, this type of predicative possession is present in Shahmirzadi anyway. The speakers tend to convert 70% 0f “ with” possession data to “ have” possession; in this type the possessor is the subject of the sentence and the possessee has oblique case. 3-There is no topic possession in Shahmirzadi language. 4-Statistical analysis of “ have” possession in corpus shows that the frequency of this type of possession is high in Shahmirzadi and the speakers tend to convert other types to this type of predicative possession; in this type the possessor is the subject/agent and the possessee is object/patient of the sentence. Table 2-The semantic map of predicative in Shahmirzadi Language Have Topic With (commitive) Locative

This paper aims to provide a typological account of nominal and predicative possession constructions in Taleshi. It follows the typological framework of ‎ Aikhenvald (2013), where different attested strategies for the expression of nominal ‎ and predicative possession along with their corresponding functions are touched on. As far as nominal possession constructions in ‎Taleshi are concerned, four strategies are used to exhibit the relationship of ‎ possessor and possessee in a noun phrase: a.juxtaposition, a possessor ending in a ‎vowel precedes the possessee; b. possessor can be marked by number-sensitive oblique case-markers (i- for singular and -u for plural), or alternatively, replaced by ‎ six different possessive pronouns, c. marking the possessee with a pronominal ‎ pertensive clitic along with related information on number and person of the possessor; d.‎ both possessor and possessee may be marked. This is done by replacing the possessor with the suppletive pronoun of ǝštan and the attachment of a pronominal ‎pertensive clitic to the possessee. Just like nominal possession, predicative possession in Taleshi is also expressed in different types of constructions, including ‎ native existential and copular constructions where the characteristics of the so-‎ called H-constructions are evident. In Mâsâli, a borrowed possessive verb of dâšte' to have' is also attested.

The present study aims to investigate the nominal and the predicative possession schemas in Persian with a cognitive approach. Schemas are abstractions from which the grammatical constructions develop. To this end, Heine's (1997) cognitive approach to the study of the Possession Schemas is considered as the theoretical framework by the authors. The results of the study show that the Action, the Location, the Companion, the Goal and the Source Schemas are used in Persian to encode the predicative possession. Moreover, the Location, the Companion, the Additive, the Genitive, the Source, the Linking and the Topic Schemas encode the nominal possession in Persian. A unique feature of Persian, which is not documented in Heine's cognitive approach, is the use of the Linking Schema to encode the nominal possession. This issue is introduced in this research for the first time. Furthermore, Persian uses the Source Schema to express the predicative possession.

In this paper, we show that Persian Grammar books and dictionaries do not agree on the lexical category of a considerable number of Persian lexical words such as ?anJam 'performing', hefz 'memorization', faramush 'forgetting' and vadar 'force'. These inconsistencies which cause both practical and theoretical negative consequences follow from the lack of understanding the real nature and main role of these words in modern Persian. Illustrating that these words have argument structure and predicative roles, we suggest that the words, based on their real usage and their predicative role, should be classified into two groups under the title of 'predicative nouns' and 'predicative adjectives'.

Since in Imamiyeh jurisprudence and civil law, Heyazat Mobahat have been considered as the causes of possession, so that in this article, a brief report is presented on causes of possession, different means to gain possession, and also topics such as unity or diversity of causativeness of Ehya and Heyazat, terms of Heyazat and Ehyaand the evidences of those who believe in causativeness of Heyazat in land possession and its assessment, permission of government in Heyzat and preparation of uncultivated land in the view of the believers in Heyzat of uncultivated lands, Mobahat, commonalities and its most important types are discussed. Causativeness, limit of ownership, base and criteria of establishment of possession in the light of "Heyazat" are the preoccupations of this article.

In the present study, the underlying delicacy of Hafez’s poetry in skillfully expressing predicative sentences is taken into consideration by examining his masterful change of word order, compared to sentence word order as put forth in grammar books. To achieve this goal, by presenting theoretical ideas of experts in the field of Persian grammar and explaining their different opinions, this study has examined the skillful use and quality of predicative sentences in Hafez’s poems. The results of this research show that: 1) In Hafez's poems, a word can be both “predicate” and “subject” simultaneously; 2) “To be verbs” and their derivatives can be used ambiguously and simultaneously both as main and linking verb; 3) Predicative sentences are usually accompanied by equivocalness, and such subtle equivocalness is not usually noticeable; 4) The substitution of predicate and subject in most Hafez's poems is accompanied by a change of meaning

One of the important discussions in predicative logic which is very close to the discussions in the logic of propositions is the problem of logical relations between propositions. This problem was often referred to under the title "contradiction and conversion" or "the principles of proposition" in early logical books, and today it is studied under the title "representative reasoning". These relations were gradually indentified in the course of the history of logic and assumed particular names. However, the correctness of some of them has been questioned by a group of logicians.In this paper, by reference to the number of logical relations and two ways of classifying them, the writer investigates whether logicians have referred to all possible logical relations, and whether all the existing ones have been identified based on rational reasoning or through induction. Finally, he tries to demonstrate how many definite relations exist between propositions consisting of two definite terms (irrespective of their being positive or negative), and which of them is more fundamental.

In a taking possession will, heirs of testator are forbidden to possess property that is subject of a will. There is no distinction, based upon different foundations, among reasons for such prohibition and under different foundations like transferring, appearance, and no need for an acceptance, the result is forbidding heirs from possession of property. The reason for above point is that a testator has an especial right over one-third of his property, therefore, till the time of rejection or acceptance of the will his legal heirs are not permitted to use the testator’, s property. For such a limitation, there is no difference either the testator die or his property transferred to his residuary. Under this foundation that after dying a person his legal heirs becomes owner of the testator’, s property, so it is possible to accept such a result for them in the case under discussion, since there many examples that a testator unable to transfer his ownership upon his property to a third person residuary. In all those cases, like conditional sale contracts and mortgage, a common factor for forbidden a testator is an implying conditions to save property or destroying it by the owner,and a seller would be able to recover the same property or has a right to return it to him by a buyer as well as a mortgager would be able to recover his money by selling the mortgage. In all those cases mentioned in above, a person who is obliged to keep a property itself or has no right to possess it. Because, possession of a property is a matter that is inconsistent with the main purpose of doing legal activities namely a passion either in a form of transferring or destroying it, or condition for saving a property directly or by implication. Under the “, Imamiyyah”,Jurisprudence, it is admitted that until the time of rejection or acceptance of a will by a residuary, those who are testators of a will have not any right to possess the property of a dead person,of course, this is not a rule that easily to accept it since it is in contradiction to rules of ownership and right of rejection to accept a will. In this article, it is tried to support a reason (s) for a prohibition of possession of a testator’, s property against those above rules.

The present paper, based on the grammaticalization theory, deals with the concept of possession in Persian (including Old, Middle and New Persian) and shows how the old way of expressing possession using the verb "to be" and dative /benefactive case is replaced by the verb "to have". In a later stage, the verb "to have" has been used to mark the progressive aspect in Modem Persian. This shift from "possession" to "aspect" is a. change that can be seen in many languages and is explained using the concepts of "semantic bleaching" and "metaphor".