جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « مطابقه مفعولی » در نشریات گروه « ادبیات و زبان ها »

Persian independent pronouns can be considered as the head of noun phrases) Shaghaghi, 2015). However, the head of the noun phrase with a prepositional phrase (preposition + pronominal clitic) can be occupied by a pronominal clitic. To deal with this dual behavior, we adopt distributed morphology, developed by Halle & Marantz (1993), to analyze the internal structure of dependent pronouns or pronominal clitics. This research draws upon descriptive-analytical method, and the data come from Persian language. In this paper, theoretical arguments as well as linguistic evidence will be employed to examine the hypotheses. We suggest that the so-called “pronominal clitics” are actually different elements with different semantic features and structural relationships. Finally, we argue that the (M) index, as a secondary product of morphological merger (Merger) between the two heads, is supposed to be the distinctive element of the dependent pronouns, not of the independent pronouns.

This paper claims different status for two rather similar sets of pronominal bound morphemes attach to verbs in Persian: first, subject agreement markers as affixes used to reflect grammatical subject agreement and second, bound person forms which are actually pronominal clitics also attach to verbs in an optional manner with optional conominal indicating cross-referencing. Siewierska (1999) believes that grammatical agreement is limited only to subject agreement thus subject agreement markers could be affixes meanwhile object agreement markers are always clitics. But it is not the case for languages with both subject and object agreement and subject agreement markers in these languages are also clitics. This paper discusses that since subject agreement markers in Persian are affixes indeed, so firstly Persian lacks object agreement and secondly pronominal clitics are cross-referencing elements. Agreement and cross-referencing are two separate strategies in Persian, agreement is a syntactic relation, constrained by Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky, 2001) while cross-referencing is a discoursal, speaker-oriented phenomenon.

Different languages make use of various linguistic tools to encode grammatical roles (GRs). ‘Case- marking’ and ‘word-order’ are among the main tools to be used to code GRs. Furthermore, ‘agreement’ is another prominent tool to be used more or less in world languages to represent GRs. Based on their typologies and morpho-syntactic properties, world languages may select one or a combination of these tools to encode grammatical roles. In the languages with poor morphology, ‘word-order’ plays a more basic role and in those languages with enriched case system, ‘case-marking’ and ‘agreement’ are more frequently employed to encode grammatical roles. On the other hand, there are various factors which may have repercussions for grammar of languages including its agreement system. The factors which are assumed to affect object agreement in this study are transitivity, (in) definiteness, being (non)referential, (non)topicality, incorporation and semantic roles of object. These factors are adopted mainly from Givon (2004) and other related studies after careful examination of related literature in the world languages. Accordingly, the present study aims at investigating object agreement of Ilami Kurdish and the above-mentioned factors which may affect agreement between pronominal enclitics and objects. To achieve these goals, a descriptive- analytic approach was adopted to deal with the collected data. The data were taken from the native speakers via interviewing and using targeted questions. To collect authentic data, 10 native speakers of Ilami Kurdish with age range of 40-60 were frequently referred to in order to check the results. Furthermore, the researchers’ linguistic intuition as native speakers of Kurdish assists them as reliable source of data. The results indicated that object pronominal enclitic can appear both at the presence and absence of direct object. In the presence of direct object, object pronominal enclitic is optional, while in the absence of direct object, object pronominal enclitics are obligatory. Accordingly, the use of object enclitics in Ilami Kurdish is an optional tool to refer (represent) to direct object. Therefore, it is concluded that object agreement to encode direct object is only used partially in Ilami Kurdish. The results, also, indicated that object enclitics are employed in Ilami Kurdish as a means to refer to object in terms of number and person. Furthermore, the results revealed that the agreement between object pronominal enclitics and direct object is affected by the above factors including chr('39')(in)definitenesschr('39'), being (non)referentialchr('39'), chr('39')(non)topicalitychr('39'), chr('39')incorporationchr('39'). Therefore, it can be concluded that felicitous object-marking in Ilami Kurdish is conditioned to these factors. For an object pronominal enclitic to be used appropriately, the referred direct object must be definite, referential, topical and non-incorporated.  It is recommended to carry out separate studies on (non)Iranian languages, especially the languages with split ergative morphology, to investigate the influence of the above-mentioned factors on their agreement systems.