Linguistic typology
Roohollah Mofidi
Abstract
In a diachronic perspective, the article investigates and compares the changes in Arabic and Persian word order, agreement, and case-marking, as the devices of differentiating subject and object. In fact, the main problem of this investigation was to discuss and follow the changes which have happened ...
Read More
In a diachronic perspective, the article investigates and compares the changes in Arabic and Persian word order, agreement, and case-marking, as the devices of differentiating subject and object. In fact, the main problem of this investigation was to discuss and follow the changes which have happened in the ways of distinguishing between the subject and object in the history of the two languages. In Arabic, the Classical variety has been compared to two of its today’s varieties, and in Persian, the changes have been followed from the Old period to this day. Persian and Classical Arabic data have been extracted from written sources, and the fieldwork part of the investigation consists of gathering data from the Arabic of Khuzestan and Lebanon via interviews with six speakers (three from each variety) by means of questionnaire and picture-description. Data-analysis shows that Arabic has lost its cases and extended its agreement system, and now it relies more on word order. Persian, on the other hand, has lost its case and agreement devices, reconstructing both later, with no changes in word order at the clausal level. Furthermore, no evidence for influences of Arabic and Persian on each other in these fields was found in this investigation, and it seems that all these changes have been language-internal, or at least, the two languages did not have effects on each other with this regard.
