مقالات رزومه دکتر سید حمزه موسوی

This paper attempts to investigate the progressive aspect in Bala-Geriveh Lori /løri/ based on Cognitive Grammar Approach (Langacker, 1982). In this dialect, the auxiliary hɑ, derived from hɑse ‘to want’, is used for making present progressive while past progressive is made by the morpheme he. Hence, this paper investigates why the use of the verb hɑse as an auxiliary is limited. For doing this research, 820 sentences were collected from villages around Khorramabad. Then the data was analysed using a descriptive-analytical method based on Cognitive Grammar (Langacker, 1982). The data demonstrated that each morpheme has specific functions because hɑ assigns progression to the action, whereas he is used for the duration or repetition of an action. Meanwhile, both morphemes are used for making imperfective processes. Unacceptance of negation, acceptability of making present perfect progressive out of stative predicates, and simultaneous use of both morphemes in a sentence are among their important idiosyncratic features.

The current study attempted to investigate ‘VinflVinfl’ construction in Persian based on construction grammar (Lakoff, 1987; Goldberg, 1995; 2003; 2006) and distinguish it from similar constructions. Since construction grammar seeks to categorize various constructions prototypically, it uses numerous syntactic-semantic pieces of evidence to differentiate different constructions from each other. The data (around 1300 sentences) were collected from stories, movies and some websites. For each construction a Sem(antic)-Syn(tactic) table was put forward to connect their features together. Furthermore, semantic constraints on these constructions such as negation and kinds of participant verbs were shown clearly. It was found that, in ‘VinflVinfl’, the former verb modifies the latter, which is a verb of movement. Its idiosyncratic feature is that it is not negated and is different from ‘Vinfl & Vinfl’. Moreover, ‘VinflVinfl’ is differentiated from other constructions such as ‘dāštan.infVinf’, ‘dādan.inf1Vinf2’, ‘VimperativeVimperative’ and idiomatic constructions such as ‘Vimperativebebinam’ and ‘zadan.infVinf’. Finally, it was observed that ‘dāštan.inflVinfl’ is a polysemous construction meaning progression, inchoation, and futurity depending on the context.

This paper attempts to describe the Theft Frame and concentrate on its Persian Lexical Units (LUs). As it is mentioned in Fillmore and Atkins (2000), lexical differences between synonyms in monolingual dictionaries are underestimated. In this research, within the ‘Theft’ frame, we aim at showing how synonymous LUs in Persian are distinguished despite the fact that they exist within a single frame. Meanwhile, our more general purpose is to define the ‘Theft’ Frame. To do this research, lexical entries for lexemes related to Theft Frame such as ‘dozdidan’, serqat kardan’, dastbord zadan’ and ‘extelas kardan’ are extracted from Sokhan Dictionary. The data and examples are collected either from Bijan Khan Corpus or from some Websites, movies and stories. Frame elements such as Perpetrator, Goods and Victim are not only active in defining lexical differences, but also are Frame-to-Frame Relations to a Crime Frame essential for determining the type of crimes.

A Cross-Linguistic Study of Near Synonymy of Visual Verbs in Persian, English, German and French Based on Frame Semantics Abstract Linguistic typology tries to investigate the linguistic universals and linguistic variation simultaneously. Lexical typology is significant since it shows how lexical varieties are shaped. Accordingly, the present paper aims at showing how Persian, English, French and German languages categorize words within the Perception-Visual subframe and uncover what similarities and differences exist between equivalent words in each of the mentioned languages. In order to find perception-visual lexical units, monolingual dictionaries are used; while for comparing words cross-linguistically, bilingual dictionaries and corpora are used. It is concluded that frame semantics is a suitable approach for explaining cross-linguistic variation and similarity since it simultaneously considers varieties and similarities. Results indicate that ‘see’ and its equivalents in German and French as well as Persian are the most unmarked word because it is almost used to express verities of visual concepts. The more marked the words are, the more variant the words are for a special feature. For the feature ‘looking stupidly’ or ‘viewing secretly’ as more marked domains compared to passive seeing, lexical variation is more considerable. 1. Introduction Linguistic typology tries to consider linguistic similarities and differences simultaneously. Lexical typology tries to compare lexical variety within languages (Croft, 2003). Although linguistic typology compares a large number of languages from different language families, the present paper used its critical tools for comparing languages from the same language family, i.e. Persian, English, French and German. This paper aims at uncovering how similar and different these languages are regarding the verbs related to the visual sense. For this purpose, frame semantics is used since it focuses on both language similarities (via frames) and linguistic differences (via Lexical Units). Based on frame semantics and lexical typology, the following questions are posed: (i) For each of these languages, how are near synonymous lexemes classified? (ii) Within the perception frame, do languages’ tendency are towards the universals or differences? (iii) What is the most unmarked word within the Perception Frame? How is linguistic variety connected to markedness? 2. Frame Semantics Frame semantics is a cognitive approach that searches for speakers’ background knowledge and experiences to define lexemes. In fact, this theory shows that linguistic elements invoke a frame (schema) in speakers’ mind based on their experiences and background knowledge. Within frame semantics, each word is defined within a particular frame. For instance, the radius is not comprehensible without referring back to the concept, circle (Fillmore, 1977a, b, c; 1986a, b; 1969; 2007; Fillmore & Atkins, 1992; 1994). Fillmore borrowed the concept frame from Minsky (1975). He (Fillmore, 1986a) mentions that frame semantics controls word and phrasal rules. Therefore, senses depend on frames (Fillmore, 1977c) and frames are the abstract perception, memory, experience and action (Fillmore, 1977a). This paper focuses on the perception frame that is borrowed from the English FrameNet. 3. Methodology For comparing purposes, firstly, the perception, perception-passive and perception-active frames are defined. Secondly, different words within the perception frame are extracted from the following monolingual dictionaries: - Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary (Hornby et al., 2000) - Oxford Duden German Dictionary (Duden et al. 1980) - Grand Dictionaire universal du XIXe siècle (Larousse, 1867) - Sokhan Comprehensive Dictionary (Anvari, 2002) Thirdly, for a more accurate comparison, some simple words are selected from the English language. Then, their equivalents are searched within both the following bilingual dictionaries and thesaurus: Bilingual dictionaries: - Millenium English Persian Dictionary (Haghshenas et al., 2005) - The Concise Oxford-Duden German Dictionary (Clark & Thyen, 1998) - The Oxford-Hachette French Dictionary (Corréard et al., 2001). Thesaurus: - Oxford Concise Thesaurus (Haweker & Waite, 2007) - The Cambridge French-English Thesaurus (Lamy, 1998) - Swann’s way (Webster’s German Thesaurus Edition) (Proust, 2006) - Persian Thesaurus (Fararuy, 2008) Fourthly, examples of different words are extracted from corpora to indicate what a word carries but is not mentioned in dictionaries. For this aim, the following corpora are used: - British National Corpus (2007) - Huge German Corpus (HGC) (Schmid, 1994) - Français Lexique (2001) - Bijan Khan Corpus (2011) Lastly, the words are compared about markedness to obtain a typological position of the mentioned languages, i.e. Persian, French and German. Note that the English language is omitted from our typological views since it is considered as constant. 4. Conclusion This paper concluded that, firstly, frame semantics is appropriate for cross-linguistic comparisons since it considers both similarities and differences. Secondly, via frame semantics, it is possible to redefine typological concepts such as markedness and economy which are simpler than the available definitions. Languages are not only internally and cross-linguistically different, but they are sometimes extra-linguistically different. Fourthly, languages have not defined language concepts based on other languages, but some concepts are culturally various than others. Lastly, from grammatical point of view, Persian tends to make more complex verbs than French and German.

In this paper, we are suggesting a website, which we have called ColloNet, for explaining lexical collocations based on frame semantics.It is going to be connected to FrameNet that is a network drawing frames of lexemes. This network not only helps us comprehend the nature of collocations, but also is an introduction to more computational linguistics researches. We have considered the word ‘dast’ to explain different functions and applications of this website. The data are collected from two Persian corpora: Bijan Khan and Persian Database. A descriptive-comparative-analytic approach has been used to compare and analyze the frames, in which the collocates, the base and the whole construction are being defined. Consequently,by comparing frames and analyzing the relations between elements, we can not only understand the type of collocation (such as simple, metaphoric or metonymic), but also obtain some information regarding historical, political, social and cultural motivations behind collocations.

This paper sets up to investigate the word didan (‘to see’) based on the frame semantics. The model provides a scientific tool enabling us to explore how the sense of words can be traced back through human’s experiences and background knowledge. The main purpose of this paper is to clarify delicate meaning distinctions, which are mainly overlooked in dictionaries. To this end, we started this study by searching different texts and corpora in order to find the semantic frames for didan from one hand, and to extract differences between the verb didan and the other partially synonymous verbs such as moshahede kardan (‘to observe’), and tamasha kardan (‘to watch’), on the other hand. Then, we try to determine how polysemous verb of didan is analyzed in terms of semantic frames. By analyzing data, we have found out that the relationship between different frames with that of Perception frame is the cause of polysemy. Furthermore, the partially synonymous verbs are differentiated from the verb “didan” based on ‘aim’, ‘target’, and other variables. Last but not least, we have put forward a model showing how didan and its different frames are related and how partially synonymous words are differentiated from it.

In this paper, spatial structures are investigated based on linguistic typological methods. On the basis of, especially, semantic typology –which is an approach used to classify language constructions, using signs and meaning –spatial constructions are classified as angular and non-angular. Non-angular constructions are composed of deictic and topological while angular constructions are vertical and horizontal. Horizontal constructions consist of three parts: absolute, intrinsic and relative. Then the typological place of Persian with regard to the systems and languages mentioned is investigated as well as how these concepts have been codified. Last but not least is providing an explanation for the way these constructions are codified.

This study attempts to study some Lori-Laki conversations based on silverstein’s framework in terms of cultural concepts and indexical orders. To this end، we apply his model as a kind of analytical tool to describe and analyse a number of interactions occurred among Lori and Laki speakers. Silverstein’s framework asserts that cultural concepts are indexed in participants’ lexicons، gestures and behaviours and are attainable by tools proposed in semiotic pragmatism. Indexical orders are likely to be obtained، and conversational orders are discernable by means of the application of poetic rituals upon the conversational discourse. Analysing conversations، it is possible to discover important factors such as “kind” of a person، participants’ biography and cultural –onomics. In this paper، we try to discover cultural concepts indexed in conversations of Lori and Laki’s speakers conversed in banquet rituals during Norouz. Some concepts like bala، belenga (up) and har، hwar (down) have been determined. The concept of poetic rituals employed as a tool to show that conversation are harmonious. Last but not least، the importance of the relation between micro-context and Macro-context have been confirmed through a conversation in which participants try to keep information away from an intruder.

Converbs or adverbial verbs are a class of verbs that are used alongside with another verb and describe it like an adverb. In this paper، first we show some examples in Persian then we should show that they can be considered adverbial verbs (Although، the data in Persian are different from the definition by Haspelmath (1995) or Langacre (1985) because of being mono-clausal and finite). Haspelmath seems to have failed in this regard and his definition is based on limited samples. After classifying these Persian converbs، we show their sharing arguments in case of progressive converbs.