Document Type : Research

Authors

1 PhD student at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

2 Associate Professor, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

3 ferdowsi university of mashhad

Abstract

Relative Clause (RC) as a complex syntactic structure in most languages has attracted the attention of many researchers. According to Lehman (1986), there are three reasons for this including Greenberg’s Universals (1963), Keenan & Comrie NP relativized hierarchy (1977) and the role of RC in studying the phases in Generative Grammar. Several linguists have studied RC and classified it into various types. In other words, there are some typological parameters for the classification of RC universally. RC at the same time has a vital role in the typological studies of word order. In the current study, we intend to examine Persian Relative Clause (PRC) based on these universal features, and afterwards to investigate the role of PRC in predicting Persian word order according to some famous typological hypotheses. In spite of several studies which analyzed syntactic or pragmatic structures of PRC, there is no comprehensive study about PRC in this respect. Therefore, this study is divided into three  main parts. The first part devotes to the studyof universal features of RC in pragmatic and syntactic aspects. Second part of this study is about the behavior of PRC according to the universal features. The role of PRC in the typological studies of Persian word order is the subject of the third part.
As mentioned above, the first part of this article is about universal pragmatic and syntactic features of RC. Based on the pragmatic aspect, RCs are universally divided into two main types of restrictive and non-restrictive. Based on the syntactic features, RCs are studied from five different aspects. First, RCs are divided into the headed and the headless. The frequency and importance of the headed RC is more than the headless one. The second and third syntactic aspects of RC are restricted to the headed RC. In other words, there are two general parameters for the headed relative clause; the first one concerns the place of the head in the structure (whether internally-headed or externally-headed) and the second one concerns the position of the modifying clause (whether joined or embedded). There are five universal kinds of the headed relative clause based on the second and third syntactic aspects of RC including proposed, circumnominal, postposed, prenominal and postnominal. Using the fourth aspects, different methods of producing RCs in all languages are studied. There are four universal methods including gap method, resumptive pronoun method, pronoun retention method and full noun phrase method. Typological studies of RC in this aspect show that the fourth method, full noun phrase, has three different approaches including correlative clause approach, internally headed relative clause approach, and paratactic relative clause approach. At last, the fifth syntactic aspect of RCs focuses on the grammatical function of the head. The best known study in this area is done by Keenan and Comeri (1977) entitled as NP relativized hierarchy. They introduced this hierarchy by studying the behavior of RC in 30 different languages. According to their findings there are a tendency in these languages for relativization of nouns by the following grammatical function:
«genitive< obliqueThe second part of this article investigates the behavior of PRC concerning the above universal parameters. For this reason, syntactic and pragmatic structures and features of PRC were studied separately. Before that, a list of related studies of PRC from different perspectives is presented as a comprehensive review of literature. From pragmatic perspective, there are both restrictive and non-restrictive RC in Persian. The results of pragmatic study of PRC show that Persian distinguishes between restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses too. Three criteria- adding a suffix ‘-i- ‘to the head of restrictive relative clause, obligatory pause between head and modifying clause in non-restrictive clause, and optional usage of non-restrictive clause - in addition to different examples are presented for showing this distinction. After that, all syntactic aspects of PRC are studied too. Findings of the first syntactic aspect of PRC show that there are both headed and headless relative clauses in Persian, although – as most other languages- headed relative clauses are more frequent in Persian. By considering the second syntactic aspect, Persian has externally headed RCs because the results of this part show that head of this constituent in Persian is always out of modifying clause. Some examples are presented to show that Persian modifying clauses are embedded within main clause (not joined). Furthermore, since modifying clauses in Persian always follow the head, Persian has a post nominal Relative structure. The results of the forth universal syntactic aspect of PRC indicate that Persian uses the first and the second method of relativization among the four universal methods including gap, resumptive pronoun, pronoun retention and full noun phrase. Of course, using gap method is prohibited when the head has a genitive function and using resumptive pronoun is prohibited when the head has a subject function in Persian. For the last syntactic aspect, all NPs in Keenan & Comrie (1977) can undergo relativization in Persian.
Focus of the third part of this study is on the role of PRC on word order. For this sake, firstly, the results of some famous studies about Persian word order are presented. After that, the role of RC in the word order investigations of Greenberg (1963), Vennemann (1973), Lehmann (1974), Dryer (2005) and Hawkins (2014) are presented and discussed. In the last part, the behavior of PRC for predicting Persian word order is presented. Investigations of PRC’s characteristics show that Persian must be a SVO language according to Greenberg (1963), Vennemann (1973) and Lehmann (1974), but it could be SOV or SVO language according to Dryer (2005). In other words, although Persian, like the East-Asian languages, is a head-final language with SOV word order, it has post-nominal RC. Therefore, Persian is potentially an interesting language in this respect, because typologically it falls in between the European and East-Asian languages. The findings of this part confirm the results of some famous Iranian linguists such as Dabirmoghadam (1392) who believes Persian is changing from a OV language into a VO one.
 

Keywords

Abdolmanafi. S. J., & Rahmani. Z. (2012). An investigation of learnability of relative clauses by EFL learners. World journal of English Language2 (3), 29-37.
Ahangar, A. A. (2000). The subordinate clause construction in Persian based on Government and Binding Theory(PhD thesis). Tehran University, Tehran, Iran [In Persian].
Alizadeh, A., & Khaleghizadeh, Sh. (2015). Using relative clauses of subject-subject and subject-object: comparison of the writings of Arab-speaking Persian learners in intermediate and advanced level. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages,(9), 59-78 [In Persian].
Arabmofrad. A & Marefat. H. (2008). Relative clause attachment ambiguity resolution in Persian. IJAL11(1), 29-48.
Azmude, H., Amuzade, M., & Rezaei, V. (2017). A study of relative clause extraposition in Persian based on discourse grammar. Journal of Language Resaerch(Zabanpazuhi), 9 (24), 59-85 [In Persian].
Bahrami, K. (2016). Comparison of Persian and German restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses. Language Related Researches7 (2), 19-32 [In Persian].
Bersnan, J., & Grimshaw, J. (1978). Syntax of free releatives in English. Linguistics Inquery(3), 331-391.
Comrie, B. (1989). Language universal and typology (2nded). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Comrie, B. (1996). Language universals and linguistic typology: syntax and morphology. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Comrie, B., & Kaoru, H. (1995). Complement clauses versus relative clauses: some khmer evidences. Amesterdam: John Benjamins.
Comrie, B., & Kutewa, T. (2005). Reletivization strategies. In H. Martin, M. S. Dryer, D. Gil & B. Comrie with the collaboration of H. Bibiko, H. Jung & C. Schmidt (Eds.), . The world atlas of language structures (pp.71-92( . Oxford: Oxford university press.
Dabirmoghadam, M. (1982). Syntax and semantics of causative constructions in Persian (PhD thesis). University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Dabirmoghadam, M. (2013). Typology of Iranian languages. Tehran: Samt [In Persian].
Darzi. A. (1996). Word order, NP movement and opacity conditions in Persian (PhD thesis). University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Dryer, M. (1992). The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language68, 81-138.
Dryer, M. (2005). Order of relative clause and noun. In M. Haspelmat, B. Comrie, M. S. Drayer & D. Gil (Eds.), The world atlas of language structure (pp. 338-341). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Frommer, P. (1981). Post-verbal phenomena in colloquial Persian syntax (Ph.D. thesis). University of Southern California, California, USA.
Gholamalizade, Kh. (2007). Persian language structure. Tehran: Ehya Ketab [In Persian].
Greenberg, H. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Grammar (2nd ed, pp. 73-113). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Haghbin, F., & Asadi, H. (2015) A role and reference grammar analysis of relative clauses in Farsi. Language Research5 (2), 21-41 [In Persian].
Hajati, A. (1977). Ke-constructions in Persian: Descriptive and theoretical aspects (PhD thesis). University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA.
Hawkins, J. (2004). Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Izumi, S. (2003). Processing difficulty in comprehension and production of relative clauses by learners of English as a second language. Language Learning53, 285–323.
Janani, C. (2000). Restrictive relative clauses in classical and modern new Persian and the marking of the antecedent. Orientalia Suecana49, 33-56.
Karimi, S. (1986). Book notice on social order in child communication. Language62 (2), 479-480.
Karimi, S. (1989). Aspects of Persian syntax, specificity and the theory of grammar (PhD thesis)University of Washington, Washington, USA.
Karimi, S. (2002). Persian complex DPs: How mysterious are they?. Canadian Journal of Linguistics3 (12), 63-96.
Karimi, S. (2005). A minimalist approach to scrambling: evidence from Persian. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
Keenan, E. (1985). Relative clauses. In Sh, Timothy (Ed.), language typology and syntactic description: Complex construction (Vol. 2, pp. 141-170). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Keenan, E., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguist Inquiry8 (1), 63-89.
Khormaee, A. (1994). Tips on extraposition structure in Persian. Allame Tabatabaei University (Master’s thesis), Tehran, Iran [In Persian].
Lehman, Ch. (1986). On the typology of relative clauses. Linguistics24, 663–680.
Lehman, W. (1973). A structural principle of language and its implication. Language49, 47-66.Mahmoodi, S. (2013). Syntactic account of Persian apposition and nonrestrictive relative clause. Language and Linguistics9 (18), 129-158 [In Persian].Mahmoodi, S. (2015). Syntactic account of Persian relative clauses: Extraposition. Language Related Research6(3), 241-269 [In Persian].
Mahmoodi, S.(2015). Syntactic account of Persian relative clauses: Extraposition. Language Related Research,6(3), 241-269 [In Persian]. 
Mahmoodi,S.(2013). Syntactic account of Persian apposition and nonrestrictive relative clause. Language and Linguistics, 9(18),129-158[In Persian]. 
Mahmoud'of, H. (1986). Word sequence in simple two compound sentences of Farsi (A. Shafahi, Trans.). Iranian Journal of Linguistics1, 53-66 [In Persian].
Mahootiyan, Sh. (2008). Persian grammar from typological view (M. Samaei, Trans.). Tehran: Nashre Markaz [In Persian].Molaee Kuhbanāni, H. M., Alizāde, A., & Sharifi, Sh. (2016). Relative clause extraposition in Persian narrative text with a functional approach: evidence from fifth to seventh volumes of Tārix-e Bayhaqi. Persian Language and Irainian Dialects1(1), 45-69 [In Persian].
Marashi, M. (1970). The Persian verb: A partial description for pedagogical purposes (PhD thesis). University of Texas, Austin, USA.
Moeinzade, A. (2005). Persian as a head-initial language. Language and Linguistics2, 129-135 [In Persian].
Mowlei Kuhbanani,H. Alizade,A. Sharifi,S.(2016). Relative clause extraposition in Persian narrative text with a functional approach: Evidence from fifth to seventh volumes of Tārix-e Bayhaqi. Persian language and Iranian Dialects, 1(1). 45-69.
Natele Khanlari, P. (1995). Persian language history. Tehran: Simorgh [In Persian].Nemat Zadeh, S., Roshan, B., Ghiasian, M. S., & Ghaffari, M. (2014). Levels of complexity of SS and SO type relative clauses in preschool Persian speaking children. Language Related Research4 (4), 221-244 [In Persian].

Nemat Zadeh S, Roshan B, Ghiasian M S, Ghaffari M.(2014). Levels of complexity of SS and SO type relative clauses in preschool Persian speaking children.Language Related Research4(4), 221-244 [In Persian].

Nikolaeva, I. (2006). Relative clauses. Elseveir, 501-508.
Rahmany, R, Marefat, H & Kidd, Evan. (2011). Persian speaking children's acquisition of relative clauses. European Journal of Developmental Psychology3, 367-388 [In Persian].Rasekhmahand, M., Alizadeh sahraie, M., Izadifar, R., & Ghiasvand, M. (2013). The functional explanation of relative clause extraposition in Persian. Research in Linguistics1(6), 21-40 [In Persian].
Rasekhmahand, M. (2014). Asymmetric sequence of head and relative clause in Persian. In M. Dabirmoghadam (Ed.), Papers on 9th Conference of Linguistics (pp. 545-552). Tehran: Allame Tabatabaei University [In Persian].
Safavi. K. (1994). Some Features of Persian Relative Clauses. In A. Miremadi (Ed.), Papers on 2ndconference of Theoretical & Practical Linguistics (pp. 197-181). Tehran: Allame Tabatabaei University [In Persian].
Safavi. K. (2001). Speeches on linguistics. Tehran: Hermes [In Persian].
Sharifi, Sh. (2004). New Persian word order based on typological issues (PhD thesis). Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran [In Persian].
Sheykho'l Eslami, E. (2008) The role of Informative Structure in clause extraposition in Persian (Master’s thesis). University of Kurdistan, Kurdistan, Iran [In Persian].
Soheili-esfahani, A. (1976). Noun phrase complementation in Persian (PhD thesis). University of Illinois, Urbana, Champaign, IL, USA.
Taghvaipur, M. (2005). Persian relative clause in head-driven phrase structure grammar. (PhD Thesis), University of Essex, Essex, England.
Tavakolian, S. (1981). The conjoined-clause analysis of relative clauses. In S. Tavakolian (Eds.). Language acquisition and linguistic theory (pp. 167-187). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Vennemann, T. (1974). Topics, subject and word order: SXV to SVX via TVX. In J. M.  Anderson & C. Jones (Eds.), Historical linguistics: Proceeding of the first international conference on historical linguistics (2ndVol., pp. 339-376), Amesterdam: Edinburgh.
Whaley, L. (1997). Introduction to typology: The unity and diversity of language, USA: Sage Publication Inc.
Windfuhr, G. (1978). Persian grammar: History and state of its study. New York: USA.