Causality in the Persian Language (from Bondarko’s St.Petersborgian School of Applied Grammar)

Document Type : Research

Author

Assistant Professor, language and literature, Literature and Humanities faculty,, University of Guilan, Rasht,, Iran

Abstract

Causality, supposedly available in any languages in the world, has been studied not only in linguistics but also in psychology, logic and philosophy. In other words, those sciences which target language and its various linguistic functions in different situations constantly have paid due attention to the conception of causality. The present descriptive-analytical study used Bondarkov’s theory of applied grammar to investigate causality in the Persian language. To this end, causality conception was addressed in the dependent complex sentences. More specifically, the presence of causality in causal /conditional/targeting and concessional complex sentences was probed. To describe causality in these complex sentences, the author utilized Bondarkov’s functional- semantic fields. Functional grammar and functional linguistics are special areas in modern language science, the special subject of study of which has become the functions and functioning of linguistic units and the linguistic system in speech. The functional-semantic field is a two-sided (content-formal) unity formed by the grammatical (morphological and syntactic) means of a given language together with lexical, lexical-grammatical and word-formation elements related to the same semantic zone interacting with them. In functional- semantic fields, the core and sub-components are distinguished. At the core are linguistic phenomena such as grammatical categories and all its grammatical expressions. In other words, the meaning of a category is clearly seen in the structure of the nucleus. In subcomponents, not all grammatical signs are fully displayed. Therefore, the meaning of the category is many times weaker in them. In addition to the category meaning, the sub-components also have the meanings of other grammatical categories.

Keywords


  1. Alawi, B (1399). His eyes, Tehran: Negah. [In Persian]
  2. Azdi, A. (1387). Book of water. Tehran: University of Medical Sciences - Institute of Medical History, Islamic and Complementary Medicine. [In Persian].
  3. Dabir Moghaddam, M. (1367). Causal constructions in Persian language. Linguistics, 1: 13-75. [In Persian].
  4. Firoozabadi, M. (1415). Dictionary of the environment. Beirut: Scientific Library. . [In Persian].
  5. Gulfam, A. (1390). Principles of grammar. Tehran: Samat. [In Persian].
  6. Ibn Manzoor, M. (1414). Arabic language. Beirut: Dar Sader. [In Persian].
  7. Ibn Rasool, M. Kazemi Najafabadi, S. Kazemi, M. (1395). Semantic relationship between base and follower sentences in Persian conditional sentences. Persian literature, 1: 93-112. [In Persian].
  8. Ibn Seiedeh, A. (1421). The strong and the great environment. Beirut: Scientific Library. [In Persian].
  9. Jamalzadeh, M. (1379). Bitter and sweet. Tehran: Sokhan. [In Persian]
  10. Khayyampour, A. (1397). Persian grammer. Report and editing by Asadullah Vahed and Mohammad Ali Musazadeh. Tabriz: Aydin. [In Persian].
  11. Maleki Esfahani, M. (1379). Glossary of Principles. Qom: The world. [In Persian].
  12. Mogharrebi, M. (1375). Eighteen speeches. Tehran: Toos. [In Persian].
  13. Mohtashami, B. (1370). Complete Persian language grammar. Tehran: Ishraqi. [In Persian].
  14. Natel Khanlari, P. (1388). Persian Grammer. Tehran: Toos. [In Persian].
  15. Nobahar M. (1389). Practical grammar of Persian language. Tehran: Rahnama. [In Persian]
  16. Okhovvat, M. (1327). Red Apple. New Message, 5: 1-7. [In Persian]
  17. Ragheb Esfahani, H. (1412). Vocabulary of Quranic words. Beirut: Dar al-Qalam. [In Persian].
  18. Rubinchik, Y. (2001). Contemporary Persian literary grammar. Translated by M. Shafaghi (1391) Tehran. [In Persian].
  19. Sajjadi, J. (1379). Dictionary of Mulla Sadr Philosophical Terms. Tehran: Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. [In Persian].
  20. Shafaee, A. (1363). Scientific foundations of Persian grammar. Tehran: Novin. [In Persian].
  21. Taylor, J. R. (2002). Cognitive Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  22. Vahidian Kamyar, T. (1364). Conditional sentences in Persian. Linguistics, 2: 43-56. [In Persian]
  23. Апресян Ю. Д. (1969). Синтаксис и семантика в синтаксическом описании // Единицы разных уровней грамматического строя и их взаимодействие. Москва: Наука. С. 32-36.
  24. Арутюнова Н. Д. (1976). Предложение и его смысл (логико-семантические проблемы). Москва: Наука.
  25. Беднарская, Л. Д. (1983). Изменения в семантике и структуре сложноподчиненного предложения условного типа в языке русской художественной прозы с 20–30-х годов ХIХ века до 80-х годов ХХ века: дис. … канд. филол. наук / Л. Д. Беднарская. Орел. С. 56.
  26. Белошапкова В. А. (1977). Современный русский язык. Синтаксис. Москва: Высшая школа.
  27. Бондарко, А.В. (1996). Теория функциональной грамматики: Локативность, бытийнность, посессивность, обусловленность. Санкт-Петербург: Наука.
  28. Волгина Н. С. (1973). Синтаксис современного русского языка. Москва: Филологический факультет СПбГУ.
  29. Галкина-Федорук Е. М. (1939). Наречие в современном русском языке. Москва: ИФЛИ.
  30. Давыдов, И. И. 1853. Опыт общесравнительной грамматики русского языка. Санкт-Петербург: Тип. Имп. акад. Наук.
  31. Земскова, Л. П. 1991. Предложения с каузальными ситуантами в современном русском языке (на материале философской литературы): автореф. дис. … канд. филол. наук / Л. П. Земскова. Воронеж. С. 15–16.
  32. Крючков С. Е., Максимов Л. Ю. 1969. Современный русский язык. Синтаксис сложного предложения. 1-е изд. Москва: Просвещение.