Semantics
Belqeis Rovshan; Hamideh Bonyadi
Volume 12, Issue 1 , January 2021, , Pages 277-304
Abstract
Cognitive sociolinguistics is a new attitude in linguistics that has appeared from the interaction of two approaches of social linguistics and cognitive linguistics and its purpose is to study the cognitive socio dimensions in daily use of language. This is a descriptive-analytical study and the purpose ...
Read More
Cognitive sociolinguistics is a new attitude in linguistics that has appeared from the interaction of two approaches of social linguistics and cognitive linguistics and its purpose is to study the cognitive socio dimensions in daily use of language. This is a descriptive-analytical study and the purpose is to analyze the Eightth Persian textbook of Junior Secondary School (Akbari Sheldereh, 1397) based on cognitive sociolinguistics. In this study the unit of analysis was "sentence" and all of the texts were examined. From among the 1200 sentences existing in the book, all sentences (500) containing image schemas were extracted while availing from Johnsons’ 1987 research. From among these (500) sentences, the ones (170 cases) containing social variables were determined and finally the interaction of image schemas and social varriables were analyzed (quantitative and qualitative) and repersented. 320 cases of image schemas and 240 cases of social variables have participated in this interaction.The results indicate that the image schemas of "force", "content", "path" and "process" and the social variables of "religion and religion attitude", "culture" and "solidarity" had the most participation in two approaches of cognitive linguistics and sociolinguistics interaction. Although, the use of more than 500 metaphorical sentences indicates that the authors of this book have paid attention to the growth of youth creativity and abstract thinking; but according to the %34 interaction of metaphorical sentences and social variables, the authors believe that the cognitive sociolinguistics approach is not presented enough. The other finding indicates that the more image schemas than social variables make the complex conceptual structure in the sentence; of course, the opposite is true. Creating a sense of sincerity with the high use of "solidarity" variable, gender discrimination and introducing Iranian-Islamic culture in the metaphorical structures are the other findings of this study.
Akram Khoshdoni Farahani; Ali Darzi; Razieh Mehdi Beyraghdar; Belghis Rovshan
Volume 10, Issue 19 , January 2019, , Pages 23-46
Abstract
Extended Abstract Introduction The foreign linguists have answered the question of why English speakers use the preterite in complement clauses while using the preterite in head clauses by three hypotheses. It is not possible to argue for or against one of the three hypotheses without incorporating ...
Read More
Extended Abstract Introduction The foreign linguists have answered the question of why English speakers use the preterite in complement clauses while using the preterite in head clauses by three hypotheses. It is not possible to argue for or against one of the three hypotheses without incorporating them into a coherent theory of tense. Within Declerck’s theory (1991a), comrie’s hypothesis (1986) is rejected but instead it is accepted that the tense of a complement clause in indirect speech according to the other hypotheses may be either a relative tense or an absolute tense. The study method is descriptive_analytic. The similarity between Persian and English examples, and the limitations governed on them are very amazing. Past perfect is one of the tenses which shows the priority on the past orientation time. The article investigates the past perfect in future domain, that is, when the head clause situation is in future. The data show using past perfect versus present perfect but our selected framework offers a natural explanation for them. Theoretical Framework Lack of acquaintance in persian makes us just state foreign linguists’ views about tense order and relations, traditionally called Sequence of Tenses (SoT). They offer three different hypotheses to answer the introduction questions. These hypotheses consist of 'absolute tense hypothesis', 'relative tense hypothesis', and 'formal SoT'. Absolut hypothesis says that the subclause situation is in the past tense because it refers to past time. Past tense as an absolute tense form relates a situation (i.e. event, state, etc.) directly to the moment of speaking. Relative hypothesis expresses that the subclause situation is simultaneous with the head clause situation, which lies in the past. Comrie's formal SoT hypothesis says if in direct speech the introductory verb is in past tense, in indirect speech a formal SoT rule automatically backshifts the tense forms from direct speech. Declerck (1990b) rejects Comrie's hypothesis and expresses that the tense of a complement clause in indirect speech may be either a relative tense or an absolute tense. While choosing Declerck’s tense theory (1991a) we see his hypothesis suitable for explaining Persian data. In his theory establishing and extending temporal domains, and the shift of temporal perspective are basic concepts that together with particular Semantics and pragmatics coming from Grice’s Conversation Maxims (1975) help us to find out some aspects of time such as SoT in Persian complex sentences. Methodology The study method is descriptive_analytic. In the study we have selected some complex sentences in Persian not needing to be indirect speech so that we can test implicitly the possibility of generation of Declerckʼs theory to the other sentences. The head clause situation is in present or future tense and the subclause prior situation is in present perfect or past perfect tense. The article writers provide a natural explanation for these Persian examples. Discussion Tense relations consist of priority, simultaneity, and posteriority. This study is an attempt to realize the temporal priority of situations in future domain called post_present domain in Declerck’s theory. The priority in future domain in unmarked case is shown by two pseudo_absolute tenses: pseudo_past and pseudo_present perfect, while in marked case it is indicated by a relative tense: past perfect. It is possible for the subclause situation refered by present perfect to be prior to the head clause situation in the present or future tense; however, using past perfect in this conditions needs to be explained because the past perfect functions as an instruction to look for a past orientation time, to which the situation time can be interpreted as being anterior. If head clause refers to the present or post_present and there is no contextually given past orientation time, it is the beginning of the head clause situation that is interpreted as being the past or pseudo_past orientation time in question. Self-evidently this is only possible if the head clause has a certain duration, so that its beginning can be seen as past with respect to the rest of the situation. Tense priority in the future domain is expressed by past tense or present perfect tense in unmarked case and by past perfect tense in marked case. Conclusion The similarity between Persian and English examples, and limitations governed on them are very amazing, while studying tense and SoT. The connotation of the similarity is that Persian and English languages follow the same principles which are the representative of the competence universality in spite of their external differences. Furthermore, Persian traditional grammar defines present perfect and past perfect so that it may not have any contrast with the core meaning of them in accepted tense system here, although it does not include all the details. Therefore, studying more about the tense forms assumes necessary.
reza Heidarizadi; Seyed Mohammad Hosseini-Maasoum; Arezoo Najafian; Belqeis Roshan
Volume 8, Issue 15 , January 2017, , Pages 53-74
Abstract
1. Introduction
Persian compound verbs have been the topic of much research and have been investigated on the basis of various approaches. A clear fact about complex predicates is that they are constructions formed by more than one lexeme. The light verb in a complex predicate is the head and the other ...
Read More
1. Introduction
Persian compound verbs have been the topic of much research and have been investigated on the basis of various approaches. A clear fact about complex predicates is that they are constructions formed by more than one lexeme. The light verb in a complex predicate is the head and the other segments are considered as nonverbal. This paper tries to describe how complex predicates formed by the light verb "Kard-an = to do" are derived. On the one hand, complex predicates are regarded as lexical units as they are input to morphological rules; on the other hand, they have been supposed to be syntactic because they can split in syntax like independent lexical items. This paper describes morphological derivation of Persian complex predicates and their syntactic separability on the basis of Phase Derivation Theory which has recently gained much attention in the minimalist tradition. The data were extracted out from Sokhan Dictionary and the online version of the Persian Linguistic Database. Tree diagrams are usually used in this theory to show the details of the structural derivations. Phase derivation theory (Chomsky, 2000, 2001, 2008) is the newest version of the generative grammar. Marantz (2001, 2007), Di Sciullo (2003) referred to the morphological phases inside word structure and explained how derivation is performed morphologically. Megerdoomian (2002) following Marantz (1997) and Chomsky (2000) claimed that there is a phase head in Persian complex predicates. In studies by Vahedi-Langrudi (1996), Karimi (1997), Megerdoomian (2002), Folli, Harley, and Karimi (2005), and Pantcheva (2008), Persian complex predicates are syntactic unites as output of the syntactic operations. Karimi Doostan (1997) regarded complex predicates as morphosyntactic units.
2. Methodology
This paper deals with two theoretical problems: first, how is the complex predicate derived, which leads to the interaction of morphology and syntax; second, why does the interaction between morphology and syntax take place during the derivation of complex predicates. In this paper, complex predicates are the output of the derivational operations in morphology that are in turn the input of the syntactic operations, so the interaction between morphology and syntax emerges. The derivation method suggested here is that roots and categories are merged first. Roots are bare and have no category and inflection. Then, a phase head is merged which carries inflectional or functional information. Phase head in complex predicates is a light verb head (v) which is merged after the merge of all the roots. The sister of the phase head is called the phase domain. This domain is impenetrable. By phase impenetrability condition, phase domain is transmitted to the interface levels and remains out of the access of syntactic operations; while, phase head plus Spec-phase is at the phase edge which is accessible to the syntactic operations. Before the spell-out, every segment should satisfy its computational needs.
3. Results and Discussion:
In Persian grammar, verb roots represent out as a tensed stem. In other words, verb root is [u-tense] which should be checked during the derivation. It is possible for a phase head to have [tense] feature (Chomsky, 2008; 2013); so, it is assumed that phase head (v) carries feature [tense]. Before spelling out, the verb root "Kon = do" in the phase domain is adjoined to (v) to check [u-tense]. By default, in Persian the nonverbal segment is represented before the verb head. Based on the correspondence axiom principle (Chomsky, 1995) the linear order is dependent on the c-command in the derivation; that is, the nonverbal element is located at the phase edge and c-commands the light verb. The nonverbal element moves in order to omit [EPP] feature of the phase head and to remain in a common derivational domain near the light verb, so that they spell out in a common step of the derivation and hence, the interpretation of the complex predicate is performed in a common minimal domain. Therefore, the verb root adjoined to the phase head (v) operates as a light verb head, and the nonverbal is adjoined to the phase edge, which is accessible to syntactic operations and can split in syntax. In some cases, a lexical root which moves to the phase edge is adjoined to an affix head. According to Lieber's (1980) morphological theory, every affix has a subcategorization frame containing the category information and the selectional restrictions. When a lexical root moves to edge of the morphological phase; if adjoined to an affix, it is inserted into the subcategorization frame.
4. Conclusion
It is concluded that the complex predicates are derived by a morphological phase. The domain of the phase remains out of access to syntactic operations. But the nonverbal element in the phase edge is accessible to the syntactic operations and becomes separable in syntax. Then, the complex predicates are derived by a phase the edge of which can split in syntax and remain separable during the syntactic derivation.
Arezoo Najafian; tayebeh Musavi; Belghis rovshan; Sayfollah Mollaye Pashaye
Volume 6, Issue 11 , July 2015, , Pages 79-98
Abstract
As pioneer trends in Iranian computational dialectology, the Leveneshtain algorithm applied to Mazandarani dialect data - extracted from LAI – revealed regional dialect in the northern range of the Alborz Mountains. Current synchronic fieldwork aimed to determine vowels responsible for regional variation, ...
Read More
As pioneer trends in Iranian computational dialectology, the Leveneshtain algorithm applied to Mazandarani dialect data - extracted from LAI – revealed regional dialect in the northern range of the Alborz Mountains. Current synchronic fieldwork aimed to determine vowels responsible for regional variation, and likewise reliability and validity of the research findings, through vowel frequency method. The linguistic material consisted of 113 interviews with NORM Speakers of 36 years old and primary level of education in average, 38% of whom were female. Representative and interpretive dialect maps validate the results obtained in previous studies with 0.84 Cronbach’s α, emphasize manifestation of regional dialect, and illustrate the front vowels / i / and / a /, verses central vowel / ə /, impose uttermost difference index on regional variations.
