A syntactic analysis of case marker -ra in Persian

Document Type : Research

Author

PhD in Linguistics, Linguistics Department of Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

This study explores the comprehensive analysis of the morpheme "-ra" in Persian, a topic that has not been extensively studied despite its importance. Traditionally, "-ra" has been considered a definite/specific direct object marker. However, non-canonical occurrences of "-ra" on adverbs, extracted subjects from embedded clauses, obligatory appearances on extracted DPs from indirect object positions, and DPs extracted from PPs complement positions raise questions about its role as an accusative case marker and the mechanism for case assignment in these constructions.
The analysis of the morpheme "-ra" in Persian is of significant importance due to its widespread usage and syntactic/semantic variations beyond its canonical role as a definite/specific direct object marker. Understanding the comprehensive distribution and features of "-ra" is crucial for unraveling the intricate syntactic and semantic properties of Persian. Despite previous attempts to analyze this morpheme, no comprehensive framework has been proposed thus far that can account for all its syntactic/semantic distributions and capture its various non-canonical occurrences. This study aims to address this gap by providing a detailed investigation into the syntactic behavior and case assignment mechanisms associated with "-ra" in Persian. By delving into these aspects, we can shed light on the intricate nature of this morpheme and contribute to the broader understanding of Persian syntax and case marking phenomena

Keywords

References

  1. Aissen, J. (2003). Differential Object Marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 21(3), 435-483
  2. Baker, M. (2012). On the relationship of object agreement and accusative case: evidence from Amharic, Linguistic Inquiry, 43, 255-274.
  3. Baker, M. (2015). Case: Its principles and its parameters. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Baker, M. C. (2008). The Syntax of Agreement and Concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Baker, M., & Vinokurova, N. (2010). Two Modalities of Case Assignment: Case in Sakha.  Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 28, 593-642 
  6. Bobaljik,J. (2008). ‘Where’s Phi? Agreement as a Postsyntactic Operation’, in Harbour, D., Adger, D., & Béjar, S. (eds), Phi Theory (pp. 295-328). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  7. Bossong,G.(1985).Empirische Universalienforschung. Differentielle Objektmarkierung in den neuiranischen Sprachen. Tübingen: Narr.
  8. Brown,W. (1970). More on Definiteness Markers: interrogatives in Persian. Linguistic Inquiry, 1 (3), 359-363
  9. Browning, M, A., & Karimi, E. (1994). Scrambling to object position in Persian. In Norbert Corver and Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.) Studies in scrambling (pp. 61-100). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  10. Chomsky, N. (2000). Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In H. Lasnik, R. A. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka, Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik (pp. 89-155). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
  11. Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz, Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-54). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
  12. Coon, J., & Preminger, O. (2014). Split ergativity is not about ergativity. In Coon, J., Diane, M., & de Mena Travis, L (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Ergativity (pp. 438–457). New York: Oxford University Press.
  13. Dabirmoghaddam, M. (1990). Around ra in Persian language. Journal of Linguistics. 7 (1), 81-92 [In Persian].
  14. Dabir-Moghaddam, M. (1992). On the (in) dependence of syntax and pragmatics: Evidence from the post-position –ra in Persian. In D. Stein (ed.). Cooperating with written texts (pp. 549-574). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  15. De Hoop,H. (1992). Case configuration and noun phrase interpretation, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
  16. Diesing, M. (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  17. Ghomeshi, J. (1997). Topics in Persian VPs. Lingua 102, 133-167
  18. Hajati, A. (1977). Ke Construction in Persian: Descriptive and Theoretical Aspects. (PhD dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana, USA.
  19. Kalin, L., & Weisser, P. (2019). Asymmetric DOM in coordination: A problem for movement-based approaches. Linguistic Inquiry, 50(3), 662–676.
  20. Karimi, S. (2003). “On object positions, specificity, and scrambling in Persian,” In S. Karimi (ed.). Word Order and Scrambling (pp. 91-124). Oxford/Berlin: Blackwell Publishers.
  21. Karimi, S. (1989). Aspects of Persian Syntax, Specificity and the Theory of Grammar. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Washington, Washington, USA.
  22. Karimi, S. (1990). Obliqueness, specificity, and discourse functions. Linguistic Analysis, 20(3 & 4), 139-191.
  23. Lampton, A. (1984). K.S. Persian Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  24. Lazard, G. (1982). Le morpheme ra en Persan et relations actancielles. Bulletin de la Societe de Linguistique de Paris, 73(1), 177-208
  25. López, L. (2012). Indefinite objects: Scrambling, choice functions, and differential marking. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
  26. Marantz, A. (1991). Case and licensing. Paper presented at 18th Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, University of Maryland, Maryland, USA.
  27. McFadden, T. (2004). The Position of morphological case in the derivation. (Ph.D. dissertation), University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania, USA.
  28. Ormazabal, J. & Juan, R. (2013). Differential Object Marking, case and agreement. An International Journal of Hispanic Linguistics 2(2), 221–239
  29. Peterson, D. (1974). Noun Phrase Specificity, (Ph.D. dissertation), University of Michigan, Michigan, USA.
  30. Rackowski, A. (2002). The Structure of Tagalog:  Specificity, Voice, and the Distribution of Arguments. (Ph.D. dissertation), MIT, Cambridge, MA, United States.
  31. Radford, A. (2004). Analysing English Sentences: A Minimalsit Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Rasekhmahand, M. (2010). Differential object marking: another look at ra. Journal of Linguistics and Dialect of Khorasan, 2(2), 1-13 [In Persian].
  33. Richards, N. (2010). Uttering trees. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  34. Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. (Ph.D. dissertation), MIT, Cambridge, MA, United States.
  35. Shafaei, I., & Dabiroghaddam, M. (2019). A Syntactic Analysis of Ergative Case Marking in Some Iranian Languages: A Minimalist View. Zabanpazhuhi, 11(31), 77-108 [In Persian].
  36. Valenzuela, P. (2003). Transitivity in Shipibo-Konibo grammar. (Ph.D. dissertation), University of Oregon, Eugene, USA.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics