An Optimality Theory Analysis of Hypocoristic Formation in the Standard Persian

Authors

1 Teacher of the University of Applied Sciences

2 Associate Professor, Department of Linguistics, University of Isfahan

Abstract

          An Optimality Theory Analysis of Hypocoristic Formation in the Standard Persian       Alireza Khanjan [1]   Batool Alinezhad [2]       Reception: 2011/01/26   Accepted: 2012/12/30       Abstract   In the present paper, we have studied phonological properties of hypocoristic formation in the Standard Persian within the framework of Optimality Theory but have not confined ourselves to this analytical level and tried, through combining phonological and socio-pragmatic analyses, to apply Optimality Theory to the interface of phonology, sociolinguistics, and pragmatics. In contrast to the general idea adopted by the standard version of Optimality Theory wherein the derivation of only one optimal candidate in the output of a process is predicted, the findings of this research emphasize on the possibility of the emergence of more than one candidate in the output. This observation, by any means, cannot be analyzed within the framework of the mainstream Optimality Theory, and for that reason, we have tried to define specific socio-pragmatic constraints, which either limit the use of hypocoristic forms to appropriate styles of Persian, or relate the overall performance of hypocoristic formation to appropriate Persian politeness strategies. As a result, the topic in question has been directed towards the significance of context of situation and, accordingly, the scope of optimality analysis has been extended to areas far beyond pure phonology.     Keywords: Optimality Theory, hypocoristic formation, Standard Persian, socio-pragmatic constraints     [1] Visiting Lecturer; Applied Science & Technology University. alirezakhanjan@gmail.com   [2] Associate Professor; Isfahan University. batool_alinezhad@yahoo.com

Keywords

References

 
-        Anttila, A. (1997). “Deriving Variation from Grammar”. Variation, Change and Phonological Theory. Benjamins, Amsterdam. PP. 35-68.
-        Katamba, F. (2006). “Back-Formation”. In: Keith Brown (ed.). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Second Edition. V. 1. Oxford: Elsevier. PP. 642-645.
-        Lazard, G. (1992). A Grammar of Contemporary Persian. Translated by A. Lyon Shirley. Costa Mesa. California: Mazda Publication in Association with Bibliotheca.
-        McCarthy, J. (2008). Doing Optimality Theory: Applying Theory to Data. Malden, Oxford and Carlton: Blackwell.
-        McCarthy, J. and A. Prince (1993). Prosodic Morphology: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. University of Massachusetts: Amherst and Brandeis University.
-        ____________ (1996). “Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity”. <http://roa.rutgers.edu/60.000/60.000>.
-        ____________ (2001). Prosodic Morphology: Constraint Interaction and Satisfaction. Second Version of J. McCarthy and A. Prince (1993). ROA.
-        Nelson, Nicole (1998). “Mixed Anchoring in French Hypocoristic Formation”. Ruling Papers 1 (Working Papers from Rutgers University). Rutgers University. PP. 185-199.
-        Prince, A. and P. Smolensky (1993). Optimality Theory: Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. Rutgers University Center for Cognitive Science Technical Report 2.
-        Raghibdoust, S. (1995). “Hypocoristic Formation in Persian”. Canadian Linguistic Association Conference (CLA 1995). Canada: Université du Québec á Montréal. PP. 484-485.
-        Roca, I. and W. Johnson (1999). A Course in Phonology. London: Blackwell Publishers.
-        Rose, R.L. (2005). “The Phonological Optimization of Nicknames in Japanese: Why Kids don't Sing 'Sachi-Chan wa ne'”. Proceedings of Linguistics Society of Japan. N. 131. PP. 228-233.
-        Smith, J.I. (2003). “Onset Sonority Constraints and Subsyllabic Structure”. <http://roa.rutgers.edu/,608-0703-smith-o.o.pdf>.
ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research)
Volume 6, Issue 12
October 2014
Pages 7-39

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics