جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « ساخت موضوعی » در نشریات گروه « ادبیات و زبان ها »

Perception verbs are important category of verbs in natural languages that express perceptual events related to human and other conscious creatures. The purpose of the present study is to explore the argument structure of perception verbs of hearing in Persian within the framework of Goldberg’s Construction Grammar (1995, 2006). The research data include a collection of 320 sentences of standard Persian extracted from the Hamshahri corpus, Persian Newspaper, (version 2). The results of the data analysis show that the perception verb ‘ʃænidæn’ (to hear), is the most polysemous Perception Verbs of Hearing in Persian that has 5 different meanings: hearing, listening, realizing, obeying, and scenting. In these different meanings, ‘ʃænidæn’ appears in 3 argument structure construction: [SUB + Nominal OBJ], [SUB + clausal OBJ], [SUB + Prepositional OBJ]. The other verbs of hearing also have their own argument structure construction which determines their semantics and syntax, but they are less polysemous than ‘ʃænidæn’. Based on the constructionist approach, it can be concluded that polysemy of the perception verbs of hearing is constructional polysemy which can be explained at the level of abstract and schematic constructions, rather than concrete words.

Perception verbs as important category of verbs are used to represent perceptual events related to human and other conscious creatures. This article examines the argument structure of the most important perception verb in Persian, i.e. “didæn’ (to see), within the framework of Goldberg's Construction Grammar (1995, 2006). The data includes a collection of 500 Persian sentences extracted from the Hamshahri corpus. The results show that the subject of “didæn’, semantically, plays the role of senser and its object plays the role of phenomenon that sometimes appears as a nominal phrase and sometimes as a subordinate clause. The verb "didæn" has a high degree of polysemy and in this study 17 different meanings have been detected. In each meaning, the argument structure differs in terms of formal or semantic properties of the object and/or the number of complements. Therefore, it can be argued that, in contrast to the projectionist approach, the argument structure of “didæn” is not dependent to the verb itself, but to a particular construction in which the verb occurs. This conclusion is in line with the constructionist approach that posits that a construction by itself has independent form and meaning.

The causative/anti-causative alternation has engendered theoretical interest within studies of argument structure at the syntax-semantic interface. The two prominanet appraoches to the syntax of the alternation, that is detransivitation and causation, do not posit distinct lexical entries for the alternation. In other words, these approaches build on the idea that one of the two alternants is derived from the other one. The purpose of this articl; however, is to show, based on Kurdish data, that there is not a derivational two-way relationship between the alternants in the alternation. Rather, it argues that both alternants are derived from a neutral single lexical entry. In so doing, evidence will be drawn from the existence of morphological variations on these alternations, verb selections and restrictions, and the contribution of prepositional phrase in relation to external argument. It will also be argued that agentivity and causativity are introduced to the structure as different projections, with the passive projecting a voice projection, while the anti-causative does not so.

The Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998) is a theory that explains the way in which language is produced by the learner. It has extensions one of which is the Topic Hypothesis. The hypothesis predicts the manner and procedure of topicalization in different stages of language learning and posits three stages for it. According to the Topic Hypothesis, the learner does not differentiate between the grammatical function TOPIC and SUBJECT. At a later stage, adjuncts appear in sentence-initial position. Finally, the TOPIC function is assigned to a non-subject core argument. The aim of this study is to direct attentions to how significant it is to be conscious of the relatively free word order in Persian sentences. The problem of the study is to survey topicalization in different levels of Persian learning according to the Topic Hypothesis. To this end, 48 audio-files obtained from the online administration of the speaking placement test of two Persian Language and Literature Refresher Courses were first put into different levels. Then, 482 sentences involving subject and complete argument structure were extracted for analysis. Analyzing the final data indicated that the Topic Hypothesis was not fully supported against the development pattern of L2 Persian topicalization.

Application, descriptively speaking, is a grammatical term used to refer to a morphosyntactic process which affects the argument structure of a verb through either the introduction of a new argument to the argument structure of the verb or the promotion of an indirect argument with an oblique status to a direct argument status. Description, and let alone analysis, of application and the ensuing applicative constructions in Iranian languages have largely failed to draw the attention of researchers working on these languages; accordingly, the current research represents the first serious attempt to study application and the applicative constructions in an Iranian language, that is Kalhuri Kurdish. To be more specific, this papers aims at introducing a set of descriptive tools to characterize the applicative construction and at elaborating on the theoretical dimensions and implications of such constructions in the light of empirical findings from Kalhuri Kurdish. As such, the current research is setting a preliminary basis for further exploration of the properties of such constructions in Iranian languages.

Many linguists have studied argument structure and argument realization in causative/inchoative alternations within the framework of lexicalist approaches. In the present paper, we will study, criticize and compare various derivatives of lexicalist approaches. Subsequently, we will test the main hypothesis underlying the mentioned accounts. In these accounts it is assumed that the verb’s lexical semantic features determine its argument structure and alternation. In this paper, based on Persian data, we will show that verb’s lexical semantics plays an important role in determination of its alternation, but the verb’s participation in causative alternation cannot be attributed sole to the verb’s semantic content. Overall, the findings of this survey cast doubt on the results of previous researches and show that other factors which transcend the verb’s lexical features determine its argument structure and its participation in causative alternation. With this regard, the other aim of this paper is to specify the factors affecting Persian verbs’ participation in causative alternation. Amongst these factors one can point to contextual factors such as semantic features of verb’s arguments and non-arguments alongside encyclopedic factors which coalesce at the level of logical form of the utterance.

Persian language frequently uses compound verbs along with simple verbs as verbal predicates. In addition to ‘compounding’ as a morphological process, ‘metaphorization’ is a semantic change method applied to the verb formation. As a typological property, these two types of verb formation strategies are used in abundance in Persian language. In this study, the essential criteria for the definition of the sentence verb is based on both the ‘argument structure’ and the different possible forms of ‘event structure’ mentioned in the sentence. This is a semantic-based approach and explores formal diversities in order to discover the meanings hidden inside them. In this study at first we look at the definition of the verb and investigate its different forms and then ‘compound’ and ‘fragmented’ verbs are introduced as two forms of the verb in Persian.

Focusing on the argument alternation of some Light Verb Constructions (LVCs) in Persian, we will show how a frame-based description of verbal polysemy may be used to answer some questions about syntactic behavior and argument structures associated with such verbs. In Persian, a number of LVCs consisting of a light verb and a preverb (PV) participate in causative alternation. The causative variant is formed with the LV ændaxtæn 'cause to fall', and the anti-causative variant is formed with oftadæn 'fall'. But in some cases, the anti-causative variant is not acceptable by native speakers of Persian, whereas the causative variant is acceptable. The peculiar behavior of these verbs in different contexts is explained in the framework of Frame Semantics (Fillmore & Atkins, 1992). We will argue that these verbs are associated with two semantic frames. Contrary to Karimi-Doostan (2005) who claims that the argument structure of LVCs is determined by PVs, and Folli, Harley & Karimi (2005) who propose that both PVs and LVs compositionally contribute to the A-structure of LVCs, using the notion of Frames (Fillmore & Baker, 2010), we propose that the whole construction including the LVC determines its A-structure.

Persian Light Verb (PLV) is of the chalengable issues in Persian Linguistics. Most of the studies on PLV are on its role in forming Noun Incorporation (NI) as well as Argument Structure. The present study has tried to investigate PLV in Persian complex predicates in terms of bleechness of the lexical meaning. In the study, it has been argued that the light verbs have been bleached distinctively in two vertical and horizontal continuemes. In horizontal continuem light verbs haven compared with each other, from the least to the most bleeched one, like xandan(to read), xordan(to eat), …, zadan(to hit) and kardan t(to do). In vertical contiuem a specific Light verb have been investigated in relation to the lexical elements, noun or adjective, can be merged withto like kotak zadan(to hit), harf zadan(to talk), telephone zadan (to call, It has been also argued that there is a direct relationship between lexicality and specifity. More specific light verbs are more lexical ones.
In this study a kite shape design has been proposed to show bleechness of PLV in two dimensions.

Argument Structure (AS) of a Predicate is a list of its arguments. For example the Persian verb xord (ate) in «Ali sib ra xord.» Has two arguments، while the verb dād (gave) in «Ali sib rā be Zahrā dād.» has three arguments: Ali، Sib، and Zahrā. The argument structure of a verb is usually changed by affixation، so that the argument structure of a derived word is different form that of the stem. This paper intends to study the argument structure of Persian verbal derivations and the effect of affixation on the argument structure of the base. The theoretical framework of this paper is Lieber''s view (1992) which states that the argument structure of each word is a projection of the Lexical Conceptual Structure (LCS) of that word. So the Study of AS of a word and the changes made in it must be done according to the LCS and the changes made in it. This paper studies the effect of affixation on the argument structure of a word through the changes it may have on the LCS of that word. It will also illustrate that only those affixes that changes the LCS of the word will affect the AS of the base; it means the affixes which do not have any effects on the LCS of a word have no changes on its AS.

This research intends to present a new pattern for providing the summary of judicial verdicts in a plain legal language. Further to linguistic analysis of the judicial verdicts, a new pattern, namely Khallaq Pattern, is introduced, by which we can produce the final summary of written judgments, including the key expressions and macro phrases of the original text, through five separate stages and in plain legal language. The linguistic corpus of the research contains 50 written judgments with both penal and legal subjects that are analyzed through the content analysis method, as a type of Descriptive-Analysis method. After implementation of the verdicts (linguistic corpus) in the Khallaq Pattern, in order to evaluate the comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of the attained summary in comparison with the relevant original text, two qualitative methods, i.e. “Comparative Study” and “Focus Group”, are employed accordingly. The obtained results indicated that the verdicts’ summary produced through the said pattern include the key expressions and elements of the original text. Further, it is more comprehensive than the main written judgment.

The aim of this study is to investigate the argument structure of deverbal nouns in Persian on the basis of Lexical Functional Grammar and to describe how the semantic roles of a verb can be represented in constituent structure of the equivalent deverbal noun. Data analyzes indicate that Mapping Principles in Lexical Functional Grammar can properly determine that in Persian the agent in transitive deverbal noun is realized as oblique and in intransitive deverbal noun as postnominal possessor. Whereas the semantic roles of patient and theme in transitive deverbal noun are realized as possessor. According to Mapping Principles the semantic role of agent in nouns which are derived frompassive construction can be realized as oblique in constituent structure

The category of compound verbs is one of the most interesting, subtle and yet complex part of syntactic researches that has attracted the attentions of many linguists and teachers teaching a second/ foreign language. Analyzing the structure of compound verbs in spoken standard Farsi language in terms of Government and binding theory, and using a new scientific method of teaching language and vocabulary, the present research tries to provide a new practical and effective way of teaching Farsi compound verbs to the speakers of languages other than Farsi.According to the finding of the research, the compound verbs can be divided into two groups: one-argument verbs and multi-argument verbs. At elementary levels, it is better to start teaching with the first group. The second group should be taught at higher levels. Moreover, it seems appropriate to use spoken materials that have already been recorded in real communication contexts.