فعل کمکی

In the non-lexicalist approach to grammar, all morphemes, whether lexical elements or function heads, are pieces that merge within the domain of syntax to form larger constituents. Consequently, what is referred to as an affix is essentially a morpho-syntactic category that occupies the head of a functional projection and selects another category as its complement (Embick 2015). The present study, adopting such an approach, analyzes the structure of the imperfective aspect in Persian and its morpho-syntactic interaction with the derivation of the perfective aspect. The imperfective aspect, one of the two grammatical aspects in Persian, is embodied in structures traditionally called progressive and continuous verbs. Like the perfective aspect, this verbal construction is used in both present and past tenses, though in contemporary Persian, the imperfective, unlike its perfective counterpart which appears in indicative, subjunctive, and sometimes imperative moods, solely indicates the indicative mood. Throughout this research, we argue that a lexicalist analysis and a feature-based theory, especially where the interaction of the prefix "mi-" with causative and perfective suffixes (“-ɑn” and “de/-te”, respectively) is concerned, fail to account for the certain inflectional forms of the verbs. Framed within non-lexicalist approach and more in the spirit of Distributed Morphology (DM) we explore the construction of the imperfective aspect in Persian and examine the interaction of its prefix with other verbal inflectional elements. In this process, we argue that in the hierarchy of functional projections of sentence in Persian, the perfective projection merges above the imperfective projection. In this structure, the head of PerfP which has an overt auxiliary verb dominates the head of ProgP which hosts a covert grammatical verb in Persian. We will see that this speculation is reinforced by empirical evidence of cliticization of the perfect auxiliary (“bɑš” in Persian and “have” in English) in the present perfect continous sentences.

One of the internal factors of linɡuistic chanɡes is the ɡrammaticalization (also known as ɡrammaticization or ɡrammatization), a process by which a previously free and independent word ɡains a ɡrammatical function and status. Historical studies indicate that most auxiliaries in many lanɡuaɡes of the world, includinɡ New Persian, have already been lexical verbs, and their use in the role of auxiliary verbs is the result of auxiliation. This article shows on a parallel with what happened in the evolution of Middle Persian, that is, the lexical verb [xwāstan] ʻwantʼ becominɡ an auxiliary verb, was used to represent the concept of the future, in some Middle and New Iranian lanɡuaɡes, especially the Central Dialects of Iran, the denominative verb [kāmīdan] ʻwantʼ was ɡrammaticalized into a future tense marker. But with the fundamental difference that in these lanɡuaɡes the verb [kāmīdan] with the loss of its lexical use as independent verb, has become compeletely an auxiliary verb or particle

The process of verb serialization is rather vague and controversial and many linguists have tried to explain the features of these syntactic constructs. Most scholars agree that a serial verb construction (SVC) is a sequence of verbs which act together as a single predicate, without any overt or covert marker of coordination and subordination. Within the framework of Minimalist Program, in this paper we investigate the syntactic properties of the Persian SVCs consisting of two or three verbs that seem to share at least a single internal or external argument and to receive the same verbal features (including tense, phi features, aspect and mood), as found in the present and past progressive sentences. However, the findings of the research state that the Persian SVCs are actually not limited to progressive aspect but it is also found in the present and past perfect structures (e.g. “u gerfte bud xābide bud” lit: S/he had taken had slept). The main question is: If serial verb constructions form chains of verbs, what kind of structural configuration can be attributed to them? Following Baker and Stewart (2002), we claim these structures arise when one or two AspPs (i.e. ProgPs or PerfPs) are adjoined to the main AspP of the sentence, while the grammatical verbs, such a “gereftan” (to take) and “dāstšn” (to have) appear to be different from Persian auxiliaries on syntactic grounds. This conclusion treats serial verb constructions as adjoining structures.

Tense is one of the inherent inflectional features or categories of the verb. Languages vary in the number of morphological tenses they express. Many languages make a distinction between the past, present and future. But tripartite tense distinctions are not at all universal. Some languages have only two distinct tenses, such as past vs non-past (i.e., present-future), or future vs non-future (i.e., past-present). The former is the situation in many New West Iranian languages and dialects. Spoken Persian also lacks the future tense. Whereas many Central Plateau dialects only mark past and nonpast in terms of tense, fewer distinguish a future tense, and even fewer (e.g., Abyanei and Tarei) make finer tense distinctions, such as proximate (indicated by inflection of the main verb) vs distant future (expressed by periphrasis). This article studies the future constructions in the two mentioned central dialects.

Many researchers believe that grammatical terminology has no spontaneous influence in the procedure of language learning. This study is trying to say that if German grammar is to be translated to Persian, the translator should take into consideration the differences between German and Persian grammatical terminology. Otherwise, the reader will face a serious challenge in comprehending the translated objects. What this research is going to focus on is a symptomatic inaccuracy. Persian language is the first language of all translators whose works involve translating from German into Persian. It would be a mistake to ignore this fact that these translators usually make mistakes in translating German grammatical terminology into Persian. This mistake exerts on the process of teaching and/or learning German language. This article tries to investigate comparatively the grammatical terminology of both the German and Persian language mentioned in works translated into Persian.

The grammatical verb bayyen ‘to become’ is found in two apparently different structures in Saravi dialect, i.e. unaccusative structures and passive sentences. Adopting a minimalist perspective, in the former structures, traditionally called copula sentences, the light verb bayyen is preceded by a non-verbal element which could be nominal, adjectival, or prepositional, and in the latter structures the auxiliary verb bayyen, appearing in the head of functional PassP, follows the past participle form of a transitive verb. Based on the empirical and theoretical evidences, the present study shows that these two structures are identical and there is no passive structure and passive projection in Saravi. This conclusion means that the light verb bayyen ‘to become’ cannot be considered as an auxiliary verb in Saravi. In sum, this grammatical verb is only used as a light verb in an unaccusative complex predicate, headed by a non-verbal element.