akram razavizadeh

This study examined the effect of naloxone on the duration of hospitalization caused by tramadol poisoning.

The studied population included all patients with tramadol drug poisoning admitted to Kowsar Karaj Hospital in 2022. The sample size was 100 people. The research data were collected with the help of a questionnaire made by the researcher to collect demographic information and hospitalization information of the patients and were analyzed and studied statistically.

The average age of patients was 26.84 ± 6.801 years. 50% of the cases admitted to the study with suicidal intent were poisoned by tramadol. The average dose of naloxone prescribed for the patients was 0.552 ± 0.3855 mg. In the examination of the clinical manifestations of the patients, among the hospitalized patients, 8% were admitted with symptoms of seizures and 9% with symptoms of respiratory depression. The average duration of hospitalization of patients was 36.31 ± 16.991 hours. There was a significant relationship between the occurrence of respiratory depression and the dose of naloxone, and with the increase of the injection dose, the probability of occurrence of depression decreased. (P = 0.001). Concerning the length of hospitalization variable, the results showed that despite the significant difference in the dose of naloxone, higher doses required. They had a longer hospital stay (P = 0.001).

The duration of hospital stays, as well as the respiratory depression caused by tramadol poisoning, can be effectively minimized by using naloxone. Most of the poisonings were done in young people to commit suicide. It seems that it is necessary to inform them about the use of tramadol.

Identifying the effective factors in the progression toward lactic acidosis and death is essential in improving the treatment of Metformin-poisoned patients. This study investigates the blood lactate level in Metformin-poisoned patients and the factors affecting it.

This was a case series study in two referral clinical toxicology centers in Iran for one year. 16 patients were included in the study. The questionnaire was filled out based on the demographic characteristics of the person, vital signs, poisoning symptoms, blood biochemistry, blood gases, blood sugar, and treatments. The lactate level was measured 6-12-24 hours later.

Three cases (18.8%) were male and 13 (81.3%) were female. The average age was 30.13 ± 16.22 years. One case of hypoglycemia, three cases of metabolic acidosis, and three cases of creatinine level above 1.2 were observed. The initial pH and bicarbonate were predictors of the lactate level. No cases of death or lactic acidosis were observed.

Blood pH and bicarbonate can be used as predictors of serum lactate increase. Also, this study showed that the probability of death and lactic acidosis with metformin is very low.

The present study examines a specific type of constructions that are not intended to get information or receive an answer and the speaker confirms his/her denial or the impossibility of the case; these types of constructions are called negative Wh-constructions. The purpose of the present study is to get the features of these constructions in Persian. Research scope is a number of negative constructions that Persian speakers agree on their correctness. Data are analyzed from two semantic – pragmatic dimensions based on Cheung (2008 – 2009). 1-3 are English negative Wh-examples and 4-5 are Persian ones:Where did he eat anything in the library?! (Kiss, 2015, p. 4) Since when/ *from when/ *when is John watching TV now?! (Cheung, 2009, p.298) Since when/ *from when/ *when is John a professor?! (Cheung, 2008, p.48)Koja Mina ketab     mi khune?!   Where  Mina      book     PRES- read Az key ta hala Maryam  qazaye   mahali dorost kardan balade?!    From when (since) Mary       food      local         cook           to be able to     Reviewing the research literature shows that so far this type of questions in Persian have been largely ignored linguistically and only rhetorical scholars in poetry and fiction have dealt with it. While the use of them is not limited to the field of literature and poetry, and are also used in a variety of Persian colloquial and discourse contexts. Therefore, in this paper, this type of constructions is studied based on the principles governing linguistics. We examine which wh-words are used in these Persian sentences. What are the special semantic - pragmatic features, and what are their differences or similarities with conventional interrogatives and other similar constructions.Our study has 3 parts: After reviewing the previous studies, presenting the framework, the features of this type of constructions are discussed semantically - pragmatically. We use different tests to determine their characteristics and distinguish them from other constructions such as conventional, emphatic, surprising and rhetorical ones. The final section deals with the results of Persian data and evidence. 

The scope of the study consists of a number of negative wh-questions that Persian speakers agree on their correctness. The data have been gathered from speakers’ everyday conversations in natural contexts. They are analyzed from semantic - pragmatic dimensions. The method of research is descriptive – analytic. 

The overall results of data indicate that despite the apparent similarity between wh-questions in Persian, the negative wh-questions are different from conventional, surprising, emphatic and rhetorical ones. The results show that conventional wh-constructions can be combined with some adverbs, but the combination of negative wh-ones with the adverbs leads to ungrammatical constructions. The examination of the data also shows that in Persian, some wh-words like where, when and who are unmarked wh-words in negative wh-constructions. Negative wh-question words do not refer to place, time, etc. Unlike conventional interrogative constructs, negative wh-ones are largely fixed in form and cannot be changed or replaced by a seemingly synonymous wh-word. Morphologically, wh-words of negative wh-constructs are restricted to a very limited set of wh-words, and semantically they are used only in the contexts that indicate disagreement. Also, reviewing data shows that in conventional wh-constructions, depending on the type of wh-word, it can be answered with a piece of fragment. While in negative wh-constructions, it is not possible to answer as a fragment.The examination of Persian data related to negative wh-constructions and rhetorical ones shows that both of them are related to non-interrogative interpretation and in both, the speaker does not follow the answer. Despite this similarity, negative wh-questions in any context show the meaning of at all and negation, but rhetoric shows both positive and negative states. Generally, the results show that negative wh-constructions are different from the other constructions mentioned above. 

Semantic - pragmatic study of these constructions show that the presence of a positive verb, lack of getting answers and limited use of wh-words are special features of these sentences that distinguish them from other similar ones. Syntactic tests including substitution, adjunct doubling, embedding, and negation dominance shows that, a) limited number of wh-words are used in these constructions. Therefore, substituting the synonymous wh-word makes these constructions ungrammatical. b) Adjunct doubling is acceptable and permissible. c) They aren't used in dependent clause positions. d) The dominance of negation in these constructions is one-sided and only the negation form dominates the whole sentence. The evaluation of syntactic features also shows the distinction between these constructions and the conventional ones.

WH-multiple questions in Persian is divided into two main categories:sequential and split.Sequential group is itself divided into two kinds including simple WH-multiple questions and coordinated.In split group,coordinated WH-questions are separate.In this research,we examine biclausal reasons of WH-multiple questions in Persian.For this,first introduce sequential WH-questions and their types,then split ones and show biclausal reasons of each one.Theoretical framework is Grachanin-Yuksek(2017)which adheres to fundamental principles governing Chomsky's Minimalism(1995)and using constituency and stand-alone test determine that in sequential coordinated wh-questions and split ones,coordinator and is related to first coordinate or second.Results show that commonality part of structure satisfying linguistic economy,ellipsis of identical constituent in one of conjuncts and multi dominance in WH-multiple questions and also ATB in sequential coordinated group suggests biclausality of these structures.Data studying indicates that in Persian,there isn’t swiping.It also shows that coordinator forms same construct both in coordinated WH-questions and split ones and coordinator and belongs to second clause.

Persian wh-multiple questions are divided into two groups: sequential and split. Sequential group includes simple and coordinated. In the split one, coordinated wh-words are separated. The purpose is to study the syntactic operation of WH-multiple questions considering the position of speaker-oriented adverbs. First, we will examine the performance of WH-multiple questions from collocation viewpoint, then, consider speaker-oriented adverbs’ position in these constructions to find out the relationship of adverbs with WH-questions. Theoretical framework is based on Gračanin-Yuksek (2017), Lipták (2011) and also Citko and Gračanin-Yuksek (2013). The method is descriptive-analytical. Data analyses of WH-questions show their collocation is grammatical with adjunct-adjunct array except in the simple coordinated ones. The position of speaker-oriented adverbs shows that æz hæme mohemtær is an only adverb with high frequency used in them. In contrast, the presence of adverbs like qætæn, sɑdeɡɑne, ʃɑjæd, bɑrhɑ, xoʃbæxtɑne, and hæɡiɡætæn in WH-multiple questions causes ungrammatically of wh-constructions. The position of ehtemɑlæn in adjunct-adjunct of sequential coordinate is before the second wh-question. The position of be rɑsti in adjunct-argument of sequential coordinate is before the first wh-question. The position of vɑɡeæn in adjunct-argument of simple coordinate type is before the first wh-question. Also, in argument-argument of sequential coordinate the position of ehtemɑlæn is before the second wh-question.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the syntactic processes involved in deriving Persian WH-multiple questions. Therefore, the function of WH-words in these constructs regarding the syntactic processes is examined. It also clarifies which syntactic functions justify their sequential or split orders. The research method is descriptive-analytic on the base of  Chomsky’s Minimalist approach (1995). Research data was collected from books, Media, newspapers, social networks and Google search engine and native speakers’ speech. Data  analysis shows that in sequential WH-multiple questions (both types), backward deletion occurs in which the identical constituent in the first clause is deleted under identity. In these constructions, the first WH-word remains in situ and the second one moves to the focus phrase after deleting the identical constituent. Scrambling is just possible with adjunct- adjunct and adjunct- argument order in these constructions. In split WH- multiple questions, the deletion of identical constituent occurs in the second clause as forward deletion in which  both WH-words remanin in situ. Scrambling in these constructions is also possible with adjunct-adjunct and adjunct-argument order. Scrambling and superiority of WH-words are not permitted in WH-multiple questions with any order of WH-words.