Background and Aim: word Recognition Test (WRT) is a widely used component of routine audiology battery. Several studies were conducted on the effect of words in word recognition lists and whether word difficulty level had an effect in word recalling process of patients. This study aims to compare the scores of patients to the designed Baş, kent WRT and commonly used Hacettepe WRT by focusing on the lexical neighbourhood. Methods: Study carried out in an Ear Nose and Throat Department of a private university hospital between June and August 2021. 34 persons with sensorineural hearing loss and 34 persons without hearing loss was participated in the study. Designed WRT and widely used common WRT were presented to the participants. Results: Results showed that common WRT included words with more lexical neighbours and sensorineural hearing loss group scores were significantly lower compared to designed WRT. Conclusion: Persons with sensorineural hearing loss have a tendency to misunderstand presented words in WRT as they may trigger other words and misguide the patient.

Background: The current study investigated lexical effects on the recognition of spoken words in Persian-speaking children with hearing impairment using Persian lexical neighborhood tests (PLNTs). Methods: The research was administered as a cross-sectional study. PLNTs were performed on thirty-three pediatric hearing aid (HAs) or cochlear implant (CIs) users by sound field under spectrally degraded conditions. Thirteen 7-to13-year-old (8 boys and 5 girls) participants completed the experiments, which were administered in a 3 × 4-m acoustic room using a sound field. The order of the tests in each session was from the lowest to the highest signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs), ranging from −,2 to 4 dB. The experiments were repeated by the same examiners under the same conditions two months later with nine of the thirteen participants. Results: Pediatric users of HAs or CIs could not optimally recognize spoken words in noise, specifically when they had to recognize words through an auditory-only modality. There was a significant difference in the participants’,SWR performance on the PMLNT-easy versus the PMLNT-hard and the PDLNTeasy versus the PDLNT-hard based on independent samples T test (P<0. 001). There was a significant difference in the participants’,SWR performance on the PMLNT-easy versus the PDLNT-easy and the PMLNT-hard versus the PDLNThard based on the independent samples T test as well (P<0. 001). Accordingly, word lexical difficulty (easy/hard words) and word length (monosyllabic/ disyllabic words) were the most fundamental factors having significant effects on the recognition of spoken words in children with HAs or CIs in the test/ retest phases. Conclusion: The PLNTs, as a valid assessment toolkit, can be reliably used to measure SWR performance under spectrally degraded conditions in Persianspeaking children with hearing impairment using HAs or CIs.

Machine translation is considered as a branch of machine intelligence with about fifty years background. Ambiguity of language is the most problematic issue in machine translation systems, which may lead to unclear or wrong translation. One of the problems involved in natural language processing is the semantic and structural ambiguity of the words. The objective of this paper to focused on the word sense disambiguation. In here, the existing algorithms for word sense disambiguation are evaluated and a method which is proposed based on the concept, structure and meaning of the words. The experimental results are promising and indicate that this proposed approach significantly outperform its counterparts in terms of disambiguation accuracy.

The Devalrani and Khizrkhan Masnavi by Amir Khosrow Dihlavi, composed in 715 (Hijri lunar), not only contains awakening points about history and the community and context of India in the seventh and early eighth century (Hijri lunar), but also includes valuable information about the uses of the Persian language and its lexicon in that particular period and area. Amir Khosrow Dihlavi (651-725 Hijri lunar) is the most well-known and outstanding Persian poet in the Indian subcontinent who has left numerous and various works as heritage. One of the significant features of his poems is the use of rare and new word-formation. If we take a random look at the entries of the Dehkhoda Dictionary, below some of the entries, there are some pieces of evidence of the poems of Amir Khosrow as well as the writers and orators before him. We can even find entries with exclusive evidence from Amir Khosrow’s poems. Additionally, some traces of his morphological innovations have been found in the works of poets and writers after him. Like Hafiz and Mohtasham Kashani, who have used ‘aeeneh ru’ and ‘vahdat abad’ in their sonnets, respectively, Bidel Dehlavi has also used ‘niaz andish’. Jami has used the word ‘belasanj’ and Orfi Sharazi and Qudsi Mashhadi have used ‘ragham sanji’ and ‘faramush gashtegan’ in their sonnets. These all have already been used by Amir Khosrow in Devalrani and Khizrkhan (the first three words), qeran sa’deyn (the fourth mentioned word), ayine-ye eskandari (the fifth word) and in a sonnet from qurat-ul-kamal (the sixth). Nevertheless, so far there have been few lexical analyses of the works of Amir Khosrow Dihlavi though, in some literary research, the works of Amir Khosrow have been occasionally examined to some extent. Among these studies is the one entitled ‘An examination of some influential Indian words in the Persian poetry’ by Rezayi Baghbidi. In this study, Baghbidi made an etymological analysis of some words found in Persian texts and provided examples for each word from the well-known Persian poets. Among these examples are some verses from Amir Khosrow. In contrast to the study by him, Salim Neysari made a comprehensive analysis of the lexical innovations in Amir Khosrow’s poems in an article entitled ‘Innovations of Amir Khosrow Dihlavi in combining Persian words’. He set ‘Noh Sepehr’ (nine heavens) Masnavi as the basis of his work and the result of his work was a list of the compounds and words used in this Masnavi for which there is either no entry in Dehkhoda Dictionary (28 cases) or there is an entry but no examples (nine cases) or there are both an entry and examples from the works of Amir Khosrow (two cases). The present study is an attempt to select and introduce rare and new words from Devalrani and Khizrkhan and its innovative word combinations and to examine Amir Khosrow’s word-combination way to show that this well-known Persian poet in the Indian subcontinent has been successful in creating new compounds. In addition, considering the fact that some of the existing word combinations in this poem have no entries and examples in the most important Persian dictionary, i. e. Dehkhoda Dictionary, the present study also seeks to introduce these new words and word combinations to be used in this dictionary and in the future lexical analysis studies. It should be noted that Devalrani and Khizrkhan is one of the romantic-historical masnavis of Amir Khosrow. The subject of this masnavi is about the love that KhizrKhan, the son of Sultan Ala’eddin Muhammad Khalaji, had for Diveldi, daughter of Raay Karan (ruler of Gujarat). Amir Khosrow composed this romantic poem in 4519 verses in the prosodic weight of Musadas-e Mahzoof/Maqsoor in 715 (Hijri lunar). In this study, first the whole poem was studied and 240 words and compounds that qualified as new and novel were selected. Then, reviewing different poetry and prose books by poets and authors who lived before the age of Amir Khosrow, 125 words and word combinations, which had been already used in these texts were put aside. For this purpose, in addition to searching the digital version of the Dehkhoda Dictionary and digital library of Noor and Noormags database, and the Ganjoor website, various textbooks in print were also searched including Tafsir-e Nasafi, Koush-nameh, Monsha’at-e Khaqani, Ali-nameh, Loqat-e Fors, Sha’eran-e Bi-divan, Mersad ol-Ebad, Nafthat ol-Masdoor, Faramarz-nameh, Tarikh ol-Vozara, Sandbad-nameh, Divan-e Najib od-Din Jorbazeqani, etc…. The results of analysis revealed a final number of 115 words and compounds not used in the works before Devalrani. These words were classified into different groups as follows: Group A: words or compounds for which there is no entry in Dehkhoda dictionary or there is an entry but the meaning intended by Amir Khosrow cannot be found in Dehkhoda dictionary (85 cases), Group B: words and compounds with entries in the Dehkhoda Dictionary but no examples (19 cases), Group C: words and compounds with entries in the dictionary and examples from Devalrani and Khizrkhan (four cases), Group D: words and compounds for which there are examples from the poets after Amir Khosrow (five cases), and finally Group E: words the meanings of which have been provided in the Dehkhoda Dictionary but with examples from the verses of other works of Amir Khosrow (two cases). The results show that Devalrani and Khizrkhan contains a number of unique and novel words and word combinations that not only reveal the poet’s skill and talent in producing new words but also reflect the lexical environment of the Persian language in India at the end of the seventh and early eighth century (Hijri lunar). Furthermore, a part of the lexical benefits of these sets of words includes the unique names and proper nouns used in this text. Out of these names, 11 names are Indian proper names used to refer to ethnicities and groups, social titles, carriers and riding animals, musical instruments, flowers and plants, one of the gods of the ancient India, and also materials and clothes. Besides these Indian proper names, there are a number of Persian names and proper names related to the living environment in India in this poem. These names also refer to ethnic groups, a type of riding animal, one of the coins being used at that time, a type of material, two types of flower and plant, and one of the partners. Additionally, an alternative word is used for riddle and spy news. In addition to these words, this romantic-historical masnavi has preserved some unique word combinations within it, words combinations that the poet has created using 31 non-repetitive (unique) methods.