Investigating the borrowing of prepositions and pronouns in Kalhori Kurdish in Kurdish-Farsi bilinguals

Document Type : Research

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Linguistics, Ilam Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ilam, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistics, Ilam Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ilam, Iran

Abstract

Language contact may have a lot of repercussions for the languages involved. Lexical or structural borrowing can be among the results of language contact. Accordingly, the present study investigates the local and borrowed prepositions and pronouns in Kalhori Kurdish due to language contact.
To fulfill this goal, a researcher-made questionnaire (list) was used to determine the local and borrowed pronouns and prepositions in Kalhori Kurdish. This list included 35 items: 11 frequent Kurdish prepositions and 24 Kurdish pronouns. The data was collected through interview. Regardless of their education, all the subjects were fluent in both Kurdish and Farsi and were regarded as active bilinguals. In terms of age range, the young participants were between 20-35 years old, and the old participants were between 50-70 years old. Based on age, gender and educational background, the selected subjects were assigned to 8 groups. Each group consisted of 10 people. Totally, 80 people responded to the items in the list through a targeted interview. The data was collected in Ilam (Eyvan) province. Kalhori Kurdish is the mother language of the people. Three-way ANOWA was employed to assess the significance of the probable variations.

Keywords

References

  1. Fereidoni, J., & Zardi, S. (2024). The Impact of Gender, Age, and Education on Language Attitudes Among Kurdish Speakers in Mahabad: A Matched-Guise Approach. ZABANPAZHUHI (Journal of Language Research), 15(49), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.22051/jlr.2023.45109.2355 [in Persian]
  2. Gowhary, H., & Jamali Nesari, S. (2020). ILexical Borrowing Hierarchies in Kolhari Kurdish: Gender, Age and Educational Background. Journal of Researches in Linguistics, 12(1), 87-110. https://doi.org/10.22108/jrl.2020.120997.1445 [in Persian]
  3. Heidari, A. (2020). The Borrowing Hierarchy of Azerbaijani from Persian. Journal of Western Iranian Languages and Dialects, 8(2), 29-59. https://doi.org/10.22126/jlw.2019.4424.1334 [in Persian]
  4. Izadifar, R. (2016). The influence of language contact on the morphological and syntactic characteristics of the Rudbari dialect of Tati. Persian Language and Iranian Dialects, 1(2), 161-176. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.65852476.1395.1.2.8.8 [in Persian]
  5. Muysken, P. (1981). Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: the case for relexification. In Arnold Highfield and Albert Valdman (Eds.), Historicity and Variation in Creole Studies (pp. 52–78). Ann Arbor: Karoma. https://hdl.handle.net/2066/14531
  6. Thomason, S.G. & Kaufman, T. (1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. USA: University of California Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/482559
  7. Van Coetsem, F. (1988). Loan Phonology and the Two Transfer Types in Language Contact. Dordrecht: Foris. https://lib.ugent.be/en/catalog/rug01:000148857
  8. Van Coetsem, F. (2000). A General and Unified Theory of the Transmission Process in Language Contact. Heidelberg: Winter. https://www.amazon.de/General-Transmission-Language-Monographien-Sprachwissenschaft/dp/3825310795
  9. Winford, Donald (2010). Theories of Language Contact. In A. P. Grant (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Language Contact (online ed., Oxford Academic, 5 Feb. 2020). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199945092.013.2

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics