DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2012.05879V1 [Cs.CL] 10 Dec 2020 Datasets and Models for the Persian Language (E.G

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2012.05879V1 [Cs.CL] 10 Dec 2020 Datasets and Models for the Persian Language (E.G Automatic Standardization of Colloquial Persian Mohammad Sadegh Rasooli1 Farzane Bakhtyari2∗ Fatemeh Shafiei3* Mahsa Ravanbakhsh3* and Chris Callison-Burch1 1 Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA 2 Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran 3 Institute for Cognitive Science Studies, Tehran, Iran {rasooli, ccb}@seas.upenn.edu, [email protected] {shafiei_f, ravanbakhsh_m}@iricss.org Abstract variations in Arabic, but it is less diverse than what we observe in Arabic dialects. The general upshot The Iranian Persian language has two varieties: standard and colloquial. Most natural lan- is that many natural language processing systems guage processing tools for Persian assume that for Persian might easily break when dealing with the text is in standard form: this assumption a mixture of colloquial and standard text. This is is wrong in many real applications especially indeed an important issue given the surge in using web content. This paper describes a simple social media and online contents. and effective standardization approach based The focus of this paper, similar to the major- on sequence-to-sequence translation. We de- ity of previous work, is on contemporary Iranian sign an algorithm for generating artificial par- allel colloquial-to-standard data for learning a Persian. Persian is an Indo-Eurpoean language sequence-to-sequence model. Moreover, we with more than 100 million speakers across the annotate a publicly available evaluation data world especially in Iran, Afghanistan, and Tajik- consisting of 1912 sentences from a diverse set istan (Windfuhr, 2009). Loosely speaking, Iranian of domains. Our intrinsic evaluation shows a Persian is used in two different but similar forms: higher BLEU score of 62.8 versus 61.7 com- standard and colloquial (Boyle, 1952; Shamsfard, pared to an off-the-shelf rule-based standard- 2011; Tabibzadeh, 2020). In some sense, this id- ization model in which the original text has a BLEU score of 46.4. We also show that our iosyncratic phenomenon is a type of diglossia for model improves English-to-Persian machine which there exists a high variety of language used translation in scenarios for which the training in formal writing, and a low variety used in spoken data is from colloquial Persian with 1.4 ab- language (Jeremiás, 1984; Mahmoodi-Bakhtiari, solute BLEU score difference in the develop- 2018). What we refer here as colloquial Persian is ment data, and 0.8 in the test data. a version of the spoken language that is mostly used 1 Introduction in Tehran (captial of Iran). However, due to the na- tional academic system and media, most people in There has recently been a great deal of interest Iran understand and use it in daily basis (Solhju, in developing natural language processing (NLP) 2019). arXiv:2012.05879v1 [cs.CL] 10 Dec 2020 datasets and models for the Persian language (e.g. Colloquial Persian has many broken words for (Bijankhan et al., 2011; Rasooli et al., 2013; Feely which some of them invent their own morphology, et al., 2014; Seraji, 2015; Nourian et al., 2015; and sometimes idiosyncratic syntactic order, and Seraji et al., 2016; Mirzaei and Moloodi, 2016; some new idioms (Tabibzadeh, 2020). It is diverse Mirzaei and Safari, 2018; Poostchi et al., 2018; and appears in different shapes from merely stan- Mirzaei et al., 2020; Taher et al., 2020; Khashabi dard syntax with some occasional broken words et al., 2020)). Despite impressive achievements, (as used in TV and radio news) to broken words most of Persian NLP models assume that the text with colloquial syntax. Depending on the formality is written in the standard form. This assumption of context and personal writing style, a colloquial is practically not true (Solhju, 2019). This partic- sentence might have some few broken words and ular phenomenon is somewhat similar to dialectal few other standard word forms: This is somewhat ∗Equal contribution in data annotation. like code-switching between two varieties of the same language instead of two distinct languages. 2.1 Model This paper proposes an automatic method for We model colloquial-to-standard text conversion standardizing colloquial Persian text. The core idea as machine translation. The input to the sys- behind our work is training a sequence-to-sequence tem is a sequence of colloquial words fx1 : : : xng translation model (Vaswani et al., 2017) that trans- and the output is a sequence of standard word lates colloquial Persian to standard Persian. We forms fy1 : : : ymg where n and m are not nec- believe that our approach is a more viable tech- essarily equal. We train a standard neural ma- nique than merely applying some conversion rules chine translation model with attention (Vaswani for standardization. On the one hand, writing an ex- et al., 2017) on a training data in which each tensive set of rules depending on different semantic colloquial sentence is accompanied by its stan- contexts is cumbersome, if not impossible. On the dard version. Figure1 shows examples of such other hand, using a sequence-to-sequence model training data. Neural machine translation uses facilitates leveraging pretrained language models sequence-to-sequence models with attention (Cho such as masked language models (Devlin et al., et al., 2014; Bahdanau et al., 2015; Vaswani et al., 2019) trained on huge amount of monolingual texts. 2017) for which the likelihood of training data D = Our experiments also proves this point. Since there f(x(1); y(1)) ::: (x(jDj); y(jDj))g is maximized by is no available parallel text between standard and maximizing the log-likelihood of predicting each colloquial Persian, we propose a random standard- target word given its previous predicted words and to-colloquial conversion algorithm based on re- source sequence: cent linguistic studies on common colloquial word forms in Persian literature (Bakhshizadeh Gashti jDj jy(i)j X X (i) (i) (i) and Tabibzadeh, 2019; Tabibzadeh, 2020). L(D) = log p(yj jyk<j; x ; θ) Our contribution is three-fold: 1) We propose a i=1 j=1 novel method for training translation models from where θ is a collection of parameters to be learned. colloquial to standard Persian, and show improve- ments over an off-the-shelf rule-based model. Ex- 2.2 Training Data Generation cept a paper written in Persian with a simple n- Since there is no parallel data to train a machine gram approach (Armin and Shamsfard, 2011) and translation model, we define a set of rules to break without any code or data release, we are not aware standard forms into colloquial forms. In general, of any work on this topic; 2) We provide a pub- there are more than 300 rules, mostly inspired from licly available manually annotated evaluation data Bakhshizadeh Gashti and Tabibzadeh(2019). Ta- for colloquial Persian with two types of standard- ble1 lists the main rules used in this work. 2 These ization for which the first only concerns surface rules include changing vowels (e.g. a!u), mod- word forms, and the second considers making the ifying verb forms (e.g. Õç'ñÂK. [beguyæm] ! ÕÂK. text stylistically standard. This data consists of [begæm]), and other types of conversion listed by 1929 sentences from different genres including fic- Bakhshizadeh Gashti and Tabibzadeh(2019). tion, translated fiction, blog posts, public group Our conversion rules define a function chats, and comments in news websites;1 and 3) We f(xi; xi+1) in which depending on part-of-speech show that our method improves English-to-Persian tag and the next word xi+1 form, a new word machine translation trained on colloquial Persian form y or a sequence of word forms are generated. data. Since we are not sure about the extent in which words are broken in text, we randomly skip some 2 Automatic Standardization and conversions with a probability of 0:1 in order Evaluation to make the text look like a mix of colloquial and standard word forms. One advantage of this There are three core components of our research: approach is that we can easily have a large amount 1) Modeling, 2) Training data, 3) Evaluation. This of parallel text to train a neural machine translation section briefly describes these three components. model. Some real examples are shown in Figure1. There are definitely many cases for which our 1Available for download from https://github. 2The code for this rules is publicly available in https: com/rasoolims/Shekasteh //github.com/rasoolims/PBreak. Example ure, the distributions of the development and test Rule name Standard Colloquial datasets are intentionally very different. à @QîE [tehran] à ðQîE [tehrun] “an” suffix à A [neSan] à ñ [neSun] 3 Experiments [gæman] [gæmun] àAÒà àñÒà In this section we describe our experiments and [berævæm] [beræm] ÐðQK. ÐQK. results. In addition to intrinsic evaluation on our Verb suffix [berævæd] [bere] XðQK. èQK. evaluation datasets, we use machine translation as [berævænd] [beræn] YKðQK. àQK. an extrinsic task for which the training data only [miguyæm] [migæm] Õç' ñ JÓ Õ JÓ contains colloquial text while the test data contains [Pistadæm] [vaysadæm] Verb form ÐXAJ @ ÐXA @ð standard text. ' [bexahæm] ' [bexam] Ñë@ñm . ÐAm . ÐYÓ@ [Pamædæm] ÐYÓð@ [Pumædæm] 3.1 Datasets and Tools [golha] [gola] “ha” suffix AêÊÇ CÇ Datasets: We use the Wikipedia dump of Persian úGAêÊÇ [golhai] úGCÇ [golai] as standard text in addition to one million sentences [saheb] [sahab] I. kA H. AgA from the Mizan corpus (Kashefi, 2018). We ran- [digær] [dige] Common rules Q KX é KX domly break words and use this data as training ' [Panja] ' [Punja] Am. @ Am. ð@ data for standardization. Figure1 shows a few [ra] [ro] @P ðP examples of converted text to colloquial. For ma- [to ra] [toro] Case marker @Pñ K ðPñK chine translation evaluation, we use the TEP paral- [Pan ra] [Puno] @P à@ ñKð@ lel data (Pilevar et al., 2011) which is a collection [be tu] [behet] Attach pronoun ñKéK .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Linguistic Conversion Mīrzā Muḥammad Ḥasan Qatīl and the Varieties of Persian (Ca
    Borders Itineraries on the Edges of Iran edited by Stefano Pellò A Linguistic Conversion Mīrzā Muḥammad Ḥasan Qatīl and the Varieties of Persian (ca. 1790) Stefano Pellò (Università Ca’ Foscari Venezia, Italia) Abstract The paper deals with Mīrzā Muḥammad Ḥasan Qatīl, an important Persian-writing Khatri poet and intellectual active in Lucknow between the end of the 18th and the first two decades of the 19th century, focusing on his ideas regarding the linguistic geography of Persian. Qatīl dealt with the geographical varieties of Persian mainly in two texts, namely the Shajarat al-amānī and the Nahr al- faṣāḥat, but relevant observations are scattered in almost all of his works, including the doxographic Haft tamāshā. The analysis provided here, which is also the first systematic study on a particularly meaningful part of Qatīl’s socio-linguistic thought and one of the very few explorations of Qatīl’s work altogether, not only examines in detail his grammatical and rhetorical treatises, reading them on the vast background of Arabic-Persian philology, but discusses as well the interaction of Qatīl’s early conversion to Shi‘ite Islam with the author’s linguistic ideas, in a philological-historical perspective. Summary 1. Qatīl’s writings and the Persian language question. –2. Defining Persian in and around the Shajarat al-amānī. –3. Layered hegemonies in the Nahr al-faṣāḥat. –4. Qatīl’s conversion and the linguistic idea of Iran. –Primary sources. –Secondary sources. Keywords Indo-Persian. Qatīl. Persian language. Lucknow. Shī‘a. Conversion. Nella storia del linguaggio i confini di spazio e di tempo, e altri, sono tutti pura fantasia (Bartoli 1910, p.
    [Show full text]
  • Persian, Farsi, Dari, Tajiki: Language Names and Language Policies
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Department of Anthropology Papers Department of Anthropology 2012 Persian, Farsi, Dari, Tajiki: Language Names and Language Policies Brian Spooner University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/anthro_papers Part of the Anthropological Linguistics and Sociolinguistics Commons, and the Anthropology Commons Recommended Citation (OVERRIDE) Spooner, B. (2012). Persian, Farsi, Dari, Tajiki: Language Names and Language Policies. In H. Schiffman (Ed.), Language Policy and Language Conflict in Afghanistan and Its Neighbors: The Changing Politics of Language Choice (pp. 89-117). Leiden, Boston: Brill. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/anthro_papers/91 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Persian, Farsi, Dari, Tajiki: Language Names and Language Policies Abstract Persian is an important language today in a number of countries of west, south and central Asia. But its status in each is different. In Iran its unique status as the only official or national language continueso t be jealously guarded, even though half—probably more—of the population use a different language (mainly Azari/Azeri Turkish) at home, and on the streets, though not in formal public situations, and not in writing. Attempts to broach this exclusive status of Persian in Iran have increased in recent decades, but are still relatively minor. Persian (called tajiki) is also the official language ofajikistan, T but here it shares that status informally with Russian, while in the west of the country Uzbek is also widely used and in the more isolated eastern part of the country other local Iranian languages are now dominant.
    [Show full text]
  • Abstracts Electronic Edition
    Societas Iranologica Europaea Institute of Oriental Manuscripts of the State Hermitage Museum Russian Academy of Sciences Abstracts Electronic Edition Saint-Petersburg 2015 http://ecis8.orientalstudies.ru/ Eighth European Conference of Iranian Studies. Abstracts CONTENTS 1. Abstracts alphabeticized by author(s) 3 A 3 B 12 C 20 D 26 E 28 F 30 G 33 H 40 I 45 J 48 K 50 L 64 M 68 N 84 O 87 P 89 R 95 S 103 T 115 V 120 W 125 Y 126 Z 130 2. Descriptions of special panels 134 3. Grouping according to timeframe, field, geographical region and special panels 138 Old Iranian 138 Middle Iranian 139 Classical Middle Ages 141 Pre-modern and Modern Periods 144 Contemporary Studies 146 Special panels 147 4. List of participants of the conference 150 2 Eighth European Conference of Iranian Studies. Abstracts Javad Abbasi Saint-Petersburg from the Perspective of Iranian Itineraries in 19th century Iran and Russia had critical and challenging relations in 19th century, well known by war, occupation and interfere from Russian side. Meantime 19th century was the era of Iranian’s involvement in European modernism and their curiosity for exploring new world. Consequently many Iranians, as official agents or explorers, traveled to Europe and Russia, including San Petersburg. Writing their itineraries, these travelers left behind a wealthy literature about their observations and considerations. San Petersburg, as the capital city of Russian Empire and also as a desirable station for travelers, was one of the most important destination for these itinerary writers. The focus of present paper is on the descriptions of these travelers about the features of San Petersburg in a comparative perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • How Cultural Differences Beyond Language Affect Dialog Between the US and Iran
    The Lens Inverts the Image: How Cultural Differences beyond Language Affect Dialog between the US and Iran. A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Cynthia Suzanne DeKay IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF LIBERAL STUDIES May 2012 © Cynthia Suzanne DeKay, 2012 For Adam, my best friend, husband and hamrāh. i CONTENTS Illustrations………………………………………………………………..…...…..…………iii Acknowledgments………………………………………...……………………...…….……iv Pronunciation Guide………………………………………....…………………….....……..v Definitions…………………………………………………...……………………...….…….vi Chapter 1 - First Impressions.....................................................................................................1 2 - A Brief history of US/Iran relations..........................................................................7 3 - Theoretical Framework.........................................................................................12 4 – A Comparison of Iranian and American Cultural Lenses ....................................16 5 - The Need for Corrective Lenses...........................................................................37 6 - Envisioning a Way to Detente...............................................................................40 Works Cited................................................................................................................45 ii ILLUSTRATIONS Figure 1: US Embassy Staff held hostage..............................................................1 Figure 2:
    [Show full text]
  • Unprivileged Power: the Strange Case of Persian (And Urdu) in Nineteenth-Century India
    Unprivileged Power: The Strange Case of Persian (and Urdu) in Nineteenth-Century India I T , but it makes no attempt to present a solution. It is rather like a bad detective story where the questions, Who did it? and how? and why? are left unanswered. Perhaps the interest of this paper should lie in the fact that the question that it asks has never before been asked, or its existence even hinted at. Why the question should never have occurred to anyone so far is itself an interesting ques- tion, and an attempt to answer it is likely to tell us something about the way the minds of our historians have worked over the last century-and-a- quarter. I will, however, make no attempt to address this latter question, for my main problem is thorny enough as it is. Simply stated, the problem is: Why is it that sometime in the early nineteenth century, users of (Indian) Persian, and Urdu, lost their self- confidence and began to privilege all Indo-Iranian Persian writers against the other two, and all kinds of Persian and Arabic against Urdu? The lin- guistic totem pole that this situation created can be described as follows: TOP: Iranian Persian, that is, Persian as written by Iranians who never came to India. UPPER MIDDLE: Indo-Iranian Persian, that is, Persian written by Iranian-born writers who lived most or all of their creative life in India. LOWER MIDDLE: Indian Persian, that is, Persian written by Indians, • T A U S or close descendants of Iranians settled in India.
    [Show full text]
  • The Vowel System of Jewish Bukharan Tajik: with Special Reference to the Tajik Vowel Chain Shift
    Journal of Jewish Languages 5 (2017) 81–103 brill.com/jjl The Vowel System of Jewish Bukharan Tajik: With Special Reference to the Tajik Vowel Chain Shift Shinji Ido* Graduate School of Humanities, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan [email protected] Abstract The present article describes the vowel chain shift that occurred in the variety of Tajik spoken by Jewish residents in Bukhara. It identifies the chain shift as constituting of an intermediate stage of the Northern Tajik chain shift and accordingly tentatively concludes that in the Northern Tajik chain shift Early New Persian ā shifted before ō did, shedding light on the process whereby the present-day Tajik vowel system was established. The article is divided into three parts. The first provides an explanation of the variety of Tajik spoken by Jewish inhabitants of Bukhara. The second section explains the relationship between this particular variety and other varieties that have been used by Jews in Central Asia. The third section deals specifically with the vowel system of the variety and the changes that it has undergone since the late 19th century. Keywords Tajik – New Persian – vowel system – Judeo-Iranian – Bukharan Tajik – Bukharan Jews Introduction This article is concerned with the vowel system of the variety of Tajik spoken by the Jewish residents in Bukhara. It compares the vowel system of this par- ticular variety with that of the same variety reconstructed based on a century- old text. The comparison shows that the variety likely underwent a vowel chain * The author acknowledges financial support for this research from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research, C #25370490).
    [Show full text]
  • Hamshahri: a Standard Persian Text Collection Abolfazl Aleahmad University of Tehran, Iran
    University of Wollongong Research Online University of Wollongong in Dubai - Papers University of Wollongong in Dubai 2009 Hamshahri: A standard Persian Text Collection Abolfazl Aleahmad University of Tehran, Iran Hadi Amiri University of Tehran Masoud Rahgozar University of Tehran Farhad Oroumchian University of Wollongong in Dubai, [email protected] Publication Details Aleahmad, A., Amiri, H., Rahgozar, M. & Oroumchian, F. 2009, Hamshahri: A standard Persian Text Collection, Knowledge-Based Systems, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 382-387. Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: [email protected] Hamshahri: A Standard Persian Text Collection Abolfazl AleAhmad a, Hadi Amiri a, Masoud Rahgozar a, Farhad Oroumchian a,b a Electrical and Computer Engineering Department, University of Tehran b University of Wollongong in Dubai {a.aleahmad, h.amiri}@ece.ut.ac.ir, [email protected], [email protected], Abstract. The Persian language is one of the dominant languages in the Middle East, so there are significant amount of Persian documents available on the Web. Due to the special and different nature of the Persian language compared to other languages like English, the design of information retrieval systems in Persian requires special considerations. However, there are relatively few studies on retrieval of Persian documents in the literature and one of the main reasons is lack of a standard test collection. In this paper we introduce a standard Persian text collection, named Hamshahri, which is built from a large number of newspaper articles according to TREC specifications. Furthermore, statistical information about documents, queries and their relevance judgment are presented in this paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Persian Basic Course: Units 1-12. INSTITUTION Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C.; Foreign Service (Dept
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 053 628 FL 002 506 AUTHOR Obolensky, Serge; And Others TITLE Persian Basic Course: Units 1-12. INSTITUTION Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington, D.C.; Foreign Service (Dept. of State), Washington, D.C. Foreign Service Inst. PUB DATE May 63 NOTE 397p. EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF-$0.65 HC-$13.16 DESCRIPTORS Grammar, *Instructional Materials, *Language Instruction, Language Skills, *Oral Communication, Orthographic Symbols, Pattern Drills (Language), *Persian, Pronunciation, Reading Skills, Sentences, Speaking, Substitution Drills, *Textbooks, Uncommonly Taught Languages, Written Language ABSTRACT This basic course in Persian concentrates on the spoken language, illustrated by conversation based on everyday situations. After a thorough grounding in pronunciation and in basic grammatical features, the student is introduced to the writing system of Persian. Some of the basic differences between spoken and written styles are explained. Imitation of a native speaker is provided, and the course is designed for intelligent and efficient imitation. Each of the 12 units has three parts: new material to be learned (basic sentences), explanation (hints on pronunciation and notes), and drill (grammatical, variation, substitution, narrative, and questions and answers) .(Authors/VM) co reN LC1 C) C=1 U-I Serge Obolensky Kambiz Yazdan Panah Fereidoun Khaje Nouri U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATINGIT. OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT POSITION OR POLICY. persian basiccourse units 1-12 it! Reprinted by the Center for Applied Linguistics 0 of the Modern Language Association of America Washington D C 1963 It is the policy of the Center for Applied Linguistics to make more widely available certain instructional and related materials in the language teaching field which have only limited accessibility.
    [Show full text]
  • DOI: 10.7596/Taksad.V8i3.2244 Lexical Features of Interlingual
    Journal of History Culture and Art Research (ISSN: 2147-0626) Tarih Kültür ve Sanat Araştırmaları Dergisi Vol. 8, No. 3, September 2019 DOI: 10.7596/taksad.v8i3.2244 Citation: Akhmedova, M. N., Yuzmukhametov, R. T., Abrorov, I. M., Beloglazova, I. G., & Bayzoev, A. (2019). Lexical Features of Interlingual Homonyms in Modern Persian, Dari and Tajik. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 8(3), 234-241. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.7596/taksad.v8i3.2244 Lexical Features of Interlingual Homonyms in Modern Persian, Dari and Tajik Mastura N. Akhmedova1, Ramil T. Yuzmukhametov2, Iles M. Abrorov3, Inessa G. Beloglazova4, Azim Bayzoev5 Abstract The relevance of the researched problem is caused by the need to study the lexical features of the modern Persian, Dari and Tajik languages, and to show students of a real linguistic situation when studying the Persian language. The aim of the article is to consider the lexical features of interlingual homonyms in modern Persian, Dari and Tajik. The leading approach in the studying of this issue is a problem-thematic approach. The study of interlingual homonyms in terms of their features and the review of the situations in which they are used in the Persian and Tajik languages shows the possible approaches to the description of their semantics. This is a new direction in the modern Persian lexicography, which is of a great scientific benefit. The submissions of this article may be useful in the teaching of the modern Persian, Tajik, Dari languages as well as when lecturing on the lexicology and dialectology of Persian, Tajik, Dari.
    [Show full text]
  • Jews in Khorasan Before the Mongol Invasion
    Jews in Khorasan Before the Mongol Invasion Shaul Shaked Professor Emeritus of Iranian Studies, Hebrew University A hoard of Jewish documents, many of them in Persian, Arabic or Judaeo-Persian and Judeo-Arabic, was discovered in Afghanistan not long ago. The circumstances of the find are not entirely clear and it is impossible to tell where exactly they were found. According to information given by traders, they were discovered in a cave, dispersed on the ground and not in a container. The cave was also a home to some small animals. New documents continue to arrive on the market, and it is possible that some of the material was dispersed to other locations. I received news of the find from antique dealers who held portions of this hoard and sent me photos of some of the documents. Having examined the original man- uscripts in London, I became convinced that this was indeed a remarkable find. Some of the papers turned out to be pages from bound codices, others were letters or legal deeds, written for the most part in the Hebrew script, and going back to the medieval period. Shaul Shaked, “Jews in Khorasan before the Mongol invasion,” Iran Namag, Volume 1, Number 2 (Summer 2016), IV-XVI. Shaul Shaked is the emeritus Professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. His research interests are Sasanian Zoroastrianism, Middle Persian, Early Judeo-Persian, History of Magic, Comparative Re- ligion, Cosmogony, Zoroastrian Religion, Archaeology and Sufism. Shaul Shaked is member of the editorial boards of several academic publications. Among his many scholarly achievements and honors are the Israel Prize in Linguistics in 2000 and of the Lifetime Achievement Award of the International Society of Iranian Studies in 2014.
    [Show full text]
  • Persian and Tajik
    DEMO : Purchase from www.A-PDF.com to remove the watermark CHAPTER EIGHT PERSIAN AND TAJIK Gernot Wind/uhr and Jo hn R Perry 1 INTRODUCTION 1 .1 Overview The fo cus of this chapter is Modern Standard Persian and Modern Standard Tajik. Both evolved from Early New Persian. We stern Persian has typologically shifted differently from modern Tajik which has retained a considerable number of Early Eastern Persian fe atures, on the one hand, and has also assimilated a strong typologically Turkic com­ ponent, on the other hand. In spite of their divergence, both languages continue to share much of their underlying fe atures, and are discussed jointly in this chapter. 1.1.1 Historical background Persian has been the dominant language of Iranian lands and adjacent regions for over a millennium. From the tenth century onward it was the language of literary culture, as well the lingua franca in large parts of West, South, and Central Asia until the mid­ nineteenth century. It began with the political domination of these areas by Persian­ speaking dynasties, first the Achaemenids (c. 558-330 BCE), then the Sassanids (224-65 1 CE), along with their complex political-cultural and ideological Perso-Iranianate con­ structs, and the establishment of Persian-speaking colonies throughout the empires and beyond. The advent of Islam (since 651 CE) represents a crucial shift in the history of Iran and thus of Persian. It resulted in the emergence of a double-focused Perso-Islamic construct, in which, after Arabic in the first Islamic centuries, Persian reasserted itself as the dominant high register linguistic medium, and extended its dominance into fo rmerly non-Persian and non-Iranian-speaking territories in the East and Central Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Iranian Languages Dénes Gazsi
    Chapter 20 Iranian languages Dénes Gazsi Iranian languages, spoken from Turkey to Chinese Turkestan, have been in lan- guage contact with Arabic since pre-Islamic times. Arabic as a source language has provided phonological and morphological elements, as well as a plethora of lexical items, to numerous Iranian languages under recipient-language agentivity. New Persian, the most significant member of this group, has been a prominent recipi- ent of Arabic language elements. This study provides an overview of the historical development of this contact, before analyzing Arabic elements in New Persian and other New Iranian languages. It also discusses how Arabic has influenced Modern Persian dialects, and how Persian vernaculars in the Persian Gulf region of Iran have incorporated Arabic lexemes from Gulf Arabic dialects. 1 Current state and historical development 1.1 Iranian languages Iranian languages, along with Indo-Aryan and Nuristani languages, constitute the group of Indo-Iranian languages, which is a sizeable branch of the Indo- European language family. The term “Iranian language” has historically been applied to any language that descended from a proto-Iranian parent language spoken in Asia in the late third to early second millennium BCE (Skjærvø 2012). Iranian languages are known from three chronological stages: Old, Middle, and New Iranian. Persian is the only language attested in all three historical stages. New Persian, originally spoken in Fārs province, descended from Middle Persian, the language of the Sasanian Empire (third–seventh centuries CE), which is the progeny of Old Persian, the language of the Achaemenid Empire (sixth–fourth centuries BCE). New Persian is divided into Early Classical (ninth–twelfth cen- turies CE), Classical (thirteenth–nineteenth centuries) and Modern Persian (from the nineteenth century onward), the latter considered to be based on the dialect of Tehran (Jeremiás 2004: 427).
    [Show full text]