conditionals are linguistic expressions expressed by means of syntactically complex forms which consist of a conditional clause/phrase and a main clause that make the occurrence of one event dependent on the occurrence of another. The present study attempts to analyze the conditional clause in Persian within the Minimalist framework. For this purpose, after a brief review of various classifications of these structures on semantic grounds, the conditional clause is considered as an adjunct clause.Then, regarding the diverse positions of conditional clause in sentence structure of various languages, two distinct approaches are introduced.Afterwards, it is proposed that as an adjunct, sentence-initial conditional clauses involve TP-adjunction and in some cases higher projections like FocP-adjunction and sentence-final conditional clauses involve vP-adjunction.Principles of the Binding Theory and deletion tests provide evidence in support of this hypothesis. The sentence-medial conditional clauses are actually the output of topicalization of those elements that have been placed before the conditional clauses.

The problem of counterfactual conditions is one of the important and adventurous questions of philosophy of science that has ample applications at sciences and daily life. This problem is strongly connected to the theory of confirmation, the problem of law, induction, words indicating talent and other problems like them. The above questions from the viewpoint of problem and solution, have the same condition so that, they are ultimately referred to this question that: what distinguishes law-like from accidental? This question despite of thinkers" effort to seek a remedy has not been solved and remains ambiguous.

Avicenna has divided the conditionals to the real cogent (i.e. with possible antecedent) and the verbal cogent (i.e. with the impossible antecedent). Denying the truth of the latter, he caused controversies among Moslem logicians. At the paper, we report the controversies, analyze the real and verbal cogent conditionals, formalize them in Modern Modal and Relevant Logics, and finally, defend ideas of Moslem logicians. In this regards, three controversial subject matters are explained and Islamic logicians’ positions on them is defended by real cogent conditional. The three are as follows: conversion of conditional, equivalences of conditionals, and Al-Razi’s claim on the necessity of consistency between antecedent and consequent of true cogent conditional.

Contingent conditionals, at the comparative logical works, has yielded different, and often inconsistent, analyses. At contemporaries' works, there are two approaches to the contingent conditionals: modal and truth-table methods. At the former, there has been used modal connectives of necessity and possibility to analyze the contingent conditionals; but at the latter, some truth-tables has been proposed. At the paper, besides presenting and criticizing the extant theories, wegain new analyses and formulations of the disputed subject matters.

The incompatibility between the connectives of natural language and the language of classical logic in the truth-functionality has led some to think that the language of classical logic is incapable of representing the natural language sentences and formulating the arguments of this language. This paper tries to show that the language of classical logic is not entirely incapable of that formulation, and the opposition's claim to the ability of the language of logic in representing the sentences and the arguments of the natural language is not complete. The defenses in this area are divided into two categories of direct and indirect defense. Although Grice's theory is a turning point for indirect defense, this paper deals with some of direct defense against defenders of the incompatibility of formalized arguments in the language of classical logic with natural language: first, with Strawson's arguments in opposition to the representation of natural language sentences by classical logic, we propound Clark's defense, and then we will see young's challenges against Clarke and Clarke's responses.

One of the most perplexing issues in Arabic Logic is the particular quantifier for conditionals. Before discussing particular quantifier at cogent conditionals, Ibn-Sina deals with particular quantifier at categorical propositions and its divisions. But, as we shall see, his explanation at categorical propositions is inconsistent with his discussion at conditionals; and his analogy between the two realms is more confusing than explaining! Despite this, in this paper, I’ ll show that by using some branches in Modern Logic, such as second-order logic, modal logic and temporal logic, many of the ambiguities and the objections can be replied. Also, I’ ll glance at the reflection of the discussion in some of Ibn-Sina’ s great followers: Fakhr Al-Din Al-Razi, Afdal Al-Din Al-Khunaji, Athir Al-Din Al-Abhari, Khaje Nasir Al-Tusi, Shams Al-Din Al-Samaqandi and Qutb Al-Din Al-Razi. I shall show haw far they are from Ibn-Sina. Besides, it will be clear that their distinctions between contingent conditional and particular cogent conditional are very weak and, indeed, cannot help any way to understand the distinction.

The current study will be focused on the analysis of modern Persian conditionals based on a cognitive-pragmatic approach. The study proceeds to answer three questions: 1) Can Sweetser's (1990) theoretical model elucidate the different cognitive and pragmatic dimensions of Persian conditionals? 2) What are the conventional readings of agar (‘ if’ , the common particle in Persian for the conditionals) in Farsi, and in which conditionals are they most present? And finally 3) Can we draw a relationship between subjectivity / intersubjectivity and conditionals? The study assumed a pure and descriptive research whose data were largely derived from contemporary spoken Persian over a period of three months. To answer the questions, the investigation is comprised of three parts. The first part includes the analysis of triple classification of conditionals (e. g. content, epistemic, and speech act conditionals) in Persian sentences based on Sweetser's model (1990) and upholds the efficiency of this model to a great extent. The second part deals with the ways in which 'agar' construes several readings in Persian conditionals and classifies them as necessary and sufficient condition, topic marker, and concessive readings. Finally, the discussion focuses on the subjectivity and intersubjectivity aspects in relation to hypotheticality of conditionals and it argued that the hypotheticality of conditionals can be fairly explained in terms of subjectivity and intersubjectivity. Accordingly, we can propose the grammaticalisation of agar in Persian conditionals. Moreover, this paper furthers the issue by looking at the ways in which conditional insubordinate clauses are triggered by cooptation (in Heine’ s term); this happens by foregrounding the components of discourse situation, in particular, subjectivity and intersubjectivity. In fact, it can be asserted that subjectivity and intersubjectivity can account for the various conditional sentences applications in Farsi.

In another paper, analyzing the negative universal cogent conditionals and formalizing Ibn-Sina’s expressions, I have shown that there was an important objection to Ibn-Sina’s analysis and that his attempts to resolving it were unacceptable. Using Ibn-Sina’s analysis of positive universal cogent conditionals, I have tried to find another solution and to show its weakness. At the end, I’ve left the ultimate solution as an open problem. In this paper, I show that the problem of that paper lies in the conditionals being truth-functional, and we can overcome the problem if we interpret the conditionals as relevant. Although the use of relevant conditionals is successful in negative universal cogent conditionals, it confronts problems in analyzing the positive ones. I show that the distinction between "real cogent" and "verbal cogent" conditionals, which is one of the most important innovations of Ibn-Sina, and making "the possibility of the antecedent" into the analysis of the positive universal cogent conditionals can solve the problems.