A Study of the Factors Influencing the Presence or Absence of “râ” in the Speech of Persian Speakers

Document Type : Research

Authors

1 Ph.D in General Linguistics, Department of Linguistics and Foreign Languages, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor, Department of Linguistics and Foreign Languages, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran.

3 Professor, Department of Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

4 Associate Professor, Department of Speech Therapy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The object marker "râ" has been extensively studied in the realm of Persian speech syntax. It has been posited that this object marker serves various functions, including definiteness marking, specificity marking, topicalization, and discourse management. Given the significance of the object marker "râ" in Persian sentence structure, it has not been thoroughly explored from various semantic theoretical perspectives. As a result, this study addresses this gap by considering different semantic factors and approaches to examine the object marker "râ" in Persian speech.
The primary objective of this study is to provide a description and analysis of the factors influencing the presence or absence of "râ" in the Persian language. To achieve this, we hypothesize that the semantic attributes of the direct object, the semantic characteristics of the direct verb, and the extent to which the direct object is affected by the verb are the three principal factors influencing the usage of "râ" in Persian.

Keywords

References

  1. Aissen, J. (2003). Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory, 21, 435-448.
  2. Asadi Mofarrh, T. (2018). Analyzing structures including more than one "rā"  in the Persian language (based on minimalism approach) (Master thesis). Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
  3. Baker, Mark & Vinokurova, N. (2009). On agentive nominalizations and how they differ from event nominalizations. Language, 85, 517–556.
  4. Beavers, J. (2006).  Argument/ Oblique Alternations and the Structure of Lexical Meaning (PhD Dissertation). Standford University, Standford, USA.
  5. Beavers, J. (2010).  The structure of lexical meaning: why semantics really matters. Linguistic Society of America, 86(4), 821-864.
  6. Beavers, J. (2011). On affectedness. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory. 29(2), 335-370.
  7. Belletti, A. & Rizzi., L. (1988).  Psych verbs and theta theory. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory. 6, 291-352.
  8. Bossong, G.(1985).  Differential Object Marking. Tubigen: Narr.
  9. Chafe, W. (1987). Cognitive constraints on information flow. In R. Tomlin (Ed.), Coherence and Grounding in Discourse (pp. 21-51). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  10. Cheraghi, Z. & Karimi Doostan, G.H. (2013). Classification of Persian verbs based on event  and aspect structure. Language Research 4(2), 41-60. [In Persian]
  11. Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Martin, R., Michaels, D. and Uriagereka, J., (Eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 89-155). Cambridge: MIT Press.
  12. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by phase. In M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-52). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  13. Comrie, B. (1989). Language Typology and Linguistic Universals: Syntax and Morphology. Oxford: Blackwell.
  14. Croft, W. (1988).  Agreement vs. case marking in direct objects. In M. Barlow & C. Ferguson, (Eds.), Agreement in Natural Languages (pp.159–179). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
  15. Dabir Mogaddam, M. (2009). “on ‘-ra’ in Persian”. In Dabir-Moghaddam, M (Ed.), Studies in Persian Linguistics.Pp. (pp. 83-146. Tehran: SAMT [In Persian].
  16. Du­ Bois, J.W. & Thompson, S.A. (1992).  Dimensions and Categories for Information Flow (Master’s thesis).  Santa Barbara, UC, USA.
  17. Ghomeshi, J. (1996). Projection and Inflection: A Study of Persian Phrase Structure  (PhD Dissertation). Toronto: University of Toronto.
  18. Kahnemuyipour, A. (2014). Revisiting the Persian ezafe construction: A roll-up movement analysis. Lingua, 150, 1-24. 
  19. Karimi, S. (1989).  Aspect of Persian Syntax, Specificity and the theory of Grammar (PhD Dissertation).  University of Washington, Seatle, USA.
  20. Karimi, S. (2003).  On object positions, specificity, and scrambling in Persian. In S. Karimi, (Ed.), Word Order and Scrambling (pp 91-124). Blackwell Publishing.
  21. Lazard, G. (1970).  E’tude Quantitave de l’evolution d’un morphe’me. Mouton, 2, 381-388.
  22. Lazard, G. (1982).  A Grammar of Contemporary Persian. CA: Mazda Publisher.
  23. Lazard, G. (2001).  Le marquage differentiel de l'objet. In M. Haspelmath, E. Konig ,W. Oesterreicher & W. Raible, (Eds.), Language Universals and Language Typology: An International Handbook (pp. 873–855). Berlin, NewYork: Mouton de Gruyter.
  24. Lehmann, C. (1995). Thoughts on Grammaticalization (2nd revised ed.). Munich: Lincom Europa.
  25. Marantz, A. (2001). Words. Unpublished manuscript, University of Southern California.
  26. Nass, A. (2004). What markedness marks: The markedness problem with direct objects. Lingua, 114(9-10), 1186-1212.
  27. Paul, D. (2003). A Certain Persian Something: Some Markers of “Indefinitness” in Modern Persian (Master’s thesis). University of London, London, England.
  28. Peterson, D. (1974).  Noun Phrase Specificity (PhD Dissertation).  University of Michigan, Michigan, USA.
  29. Rothstein, S.D. (2004). Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect. Oxford: Blackwell.
  30. Rothstein, S.D. (2008a). Telicity, atomicity, and the Vendler classification of verbs. Theoretical and Crosslinguistic Approaches to Aspect, 43-77.
  31. Rothstein, S.D. (2008b).  Structuring Events: A Study in the Semantics of Lexical Aspect. New York: John Willey & Sons.
  32. Shafahi, E. (2023).  A syntactic analysis of case marker -ra in Persian. Journal of Language Research, 15(47), 213-237.
  33. Shokuhi, H. & Kipka, P. (2003).  Discourse function of  Rā. Lingua, 113, 953-966.
  34. Tavakkoli, T. (2016). "Rā" in Dari intransitive structures (Master’s thesis). Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian]
  35. Tenny, C. (1987). Grammaticalizing Aspect and Affectedness. (PhD Dissertation). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, USA.
  36. Vendler, Z. (1957).  Verbs and times. Phiosophical Review, 66(2), 143-60.
  37. Vendler, Z. (1967).  Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell.
  38. Von Heusinger, K. (2008). Verbal semantics and the diachronic develapment differential object marking in Spanish.  Press, 20(1), 1-31.
ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research)
Volume 15, Issue 48
December 2023
Pages 225-252

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics