Revision and classification of past participles with the typological prototype approach

INTRODUCTION

In this research, we have had an exact categorization for different kinds of derivational and derivational-compound past participles in the frame of typological prototypes which is a universal approach towards the parts of speech. In this theory, prototypical  adjectives with no morphemes belong to the semantic class of ‘property’ and to ‘modification’ in terms of propositional act constructions. These prototypical adjectives should be simple and without any morphemes on the basis of structural coding of typological prototypes theory. Furthermore, the adjectives which are not simple and have morphemes, are considered as marked and non- prototypical adjectives. Indeed, the structural coding criterion specifies only that the marked member is encoded by at least as many morphemes as the unmarked member (croft, 1999:73). This generalization is an implicational universal. If a language codes a typologically unmarked member of a grammatical category by n morphemes (n > 0), then it codes a typologically marked member of that category by at least n morphemes. Past participles which are studied in this research, are marked and are not simple structurally. They are divided to derivational and derivational- compound ones which have all morphemes. Derivational past participles are made by the past stem of verb + a suffix (-h) and the derivational-compound past participles are made by a noun, adjective, adverb, pronoun + derivational past participle (stem of a verb+ suffix(h)). Therefore, they are not prototypical in terms of their structure and their different semantic class. Typological markedness also constrains the distribution of constructions exhibiting the behavioral potential of the categories; if a construction encoding the behavioral potential of members of a grammatical category is found in that category, it is found with at least the unmarked member of that category for that construction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this research, examples of derivational and derivational-compound past participles are collected from the definitions and classifications of Persian grammarians and linguists. Then the examples of past participles are verified based on the typological criteria; structural coding and behavioral potential. All the examples are studied through the consideration of their adjectival and nominal behavioral potentials. Finally, their status and positions are specified in the Croft’s parts of speech semantic map. Then the new classification of past participles regarding their nominal and adjectival behaviors are placed in the behavioral diagrams.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Past participles do not act similarly and are not uniform on the basis of behavioral potential. Therefore, they are not in the same level. Some derivational past participles are used both with adjectival and nominal behavioral potentials. Some of them are used only in modification and propositional constructions and with nominal behavioral criteria.  Some are used only in modification and propositional constructions.  Some of derivational-compound past participles are used as both adjectives and nouns. Some of them are used only in modification and propositional constructions and with nominal behavioral criteria. Moreover, some are used only in propositional constructions with all of nominal behavioral potentials which are considered as marked nouns. In this research, past participles behavioral potential is verified and at last it is shown that they follow the behavioral potential of typological prototype theory. Totally, their behavioral potential is not more than the behavioral potentials of unmarked nouns. Hence, they are marked category in terms of both structural coding and behavioral potential.  Finally, their position is specified on the semantic map and their behavioral potentials are shown through diagrams. The position of derivational and derivational-compound past participles on the semantic map are considered as ‘action’ in terms of semantic class and ‘modification’ in terms of propositional act. Because in all derivational and derivational-compound past participles, we have used an action for the propositional act of modification. In other words, by marking and adding morphemes to an action as a semantic class, we have used it for acting as modification. Therefore, the position of past participles is shown in the semantic map as figure 1 below.

CONCLUSION

Derivational and derivational-compound past participles’ new classifications on the basis of their adjectival, nominal or both are placed on the behavioral diagrams. behavioral potentials are shown by ovals and the positions of past participles are shown by (*) in the ovals.  One oval is dedicated to adjectival criteria. One oval is dedicated to nominal criteria. These ovals have some common spaces which are considered for past participles which have both the adjectival and nominal behavioral potential.

"Reference to PDF article"
Figure 1. semantic map of Persian parts of speech constructions

Another classification is considered for a class of derivational- compound past participles which are made by a noun and the past participle of verbs ‘zadeh’: giving birth and ‘xandeh’: to call someone’. This class of derivational-compound past participles have only nominal usage. They are used with all of the nominal behavioral criteria and are not used with specific behavioral potentials of adjectives. In other words, they cannot be gradable, they are not used with intensifiers and are not used in the modification constructions. These are the most specific properties of prototypical adjectives. They only are used in the propositional constructions. It should be mentioned that nouns also could be used in the propositional constructions. So, this class of derivational-compound past participles are considered as marked nouns and not adjectives. Therefore, their position in the semantic map is considered as ‘action’ in terms of semantic class and ‘reference’ in terms of propositional act. If their propositional act was modification, they could be used as adjectives. It means they could be used with the most specific adjectival properties (able to be gradable, used with intensifiers and used in modification constructions). However, Persian speakers have used this construction to refer and name some specific persons. Accordingly, their propositional act would be reference and not modification. Therefore, they are called persons’ name.