DOCSLIB.ORG

The Typology of Modality in Modern West Iranian Languages

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Faculty of Arts Faculty of Humanities Dissertation Presented for the Degree of Ph.D. in Linguistics Department of Linguistics The Typology of Modality in Modern West Iranian Languages Thesis submitted for the degree of doctor in Linguistics at the University of Antwerp and Tarbiyat Modarres University to be defended by Sepideh Koohkan Supervisors: Jan Nuyts, Arsalan Golfam Antwerp, 2019 i ii Abstract Modality concerns with the modifications and semantic changes, which the speaker makes in the proposition to indicate his/her commitment and assessment to the state of affairs. On the other hand, typology deals with the varieties in languages to achieve generalizations cross-linguistically. This thesis studies modality, as a semantic notion and typology, as mostly a formal category, in eleven modern West Iranian languages, including Balochi (Bamposht), Gerashi, Gilaki (Shafti dialect), Hawrami (Hawraman Takht), Kahangi, Kurdish (Central Kurdish, Sorani), Lori (Balagariveh dialect), Persian, Semnani, Tati (Takestani dialect) and Vafsi based on Nuyts (2005 and furthermore). The main goal of this dissertation is to examine the possibility of categorizing languages based on a semantic feature, which is modality here, and to discover the differences between this type of classification of languages and the other available categorizations which mostly have a morphological or syntactic basis. The results reveal that all these languages, enjoy different types of expressions to express modality, including modal auxiliaries, nouns, adjectives, adverbs and main verbs (mostly complex verbs). However, this enjoyment is systematic, i.e. first, in all above languages, these are the modal auxiliaries which not only have a high frequency in the languages, but they are also the more native elements. Secondly, some languages, including Balochi (Bamposht dialect) and Hawrami (Hawraman Takht dialect) apply adverbs to express those dimensions of modality which prototypically is on modal auxiliaries in other languages to express and that is why they contain less modal auxiliaries comparing to other languages. Finally, modal nouns and adjectives (and consequently modal main verbs, which are mostly complex verbs, constructed with modal nouns/adjectives and a light verb), directly or indirectly are loan words from Arabic language. Furthermore, modal auxiliaries, and also some of the other modal elements, are polysemous, that is, they are used to state several meanings in the domain of modality. In search for classifying languages based on a semantic feature, besides the semantic map of modality in these languages, two other methods were also suggested. One, classifying languages, according to the number of the elements they apply to express modality. In this method, instead of presenting branching which a language is or is not a member of, a continuum was proposed where all languages laid on it based on the number of modal auxiliaries and modal adverbs. The other, classifies languages, on the basis of their origin, where the modal auxiliaries with the same source, are grouped together as one category. Keywords: modality, typology, Modern West Iranian languages, semantic map, polysemy, grammaticalization, (inter)subjectification. i ii Table of Content Chapter one: Introduction 1 Chapter Two: Typology and Iranian Languages 2.0 Overview 6 2.1 Typology and semantic typology 6 2.2 State of the problem 9 2.3 Iranian languages 13 2.3.1 Parts of speech in modern west Iranian languages 16 2.3.1.1 Verb 17 2.3.1.2 Noun 23 2.3.1.3 Pronoun 25 2.3.1.4 Adjective 27 2.3.1.5 Adverb 28 2.3.1.6 Particles 28 2.3.2 Word order and more in modern west Iranian Languages 30 2.3.2.1. Persian 32 2.3.2.1.1 Word order 33 2.3.2.1.2 Case System 38 2.3.2.1.3 Agreement system 39 2.3.2.1.4 Tense 40 2.3.2.1.5 Mood 43 2.3.2.1.6 Ezafe/Genitive 43 2.3.2.2 Balochi 44 2.3.2.2.1 Word Order 45 i 2.3.2.3 Gilaki/Guilaki 50 2.3.2.3.1 Word Order 51 2.3.2.3.2 Other Features 54 2.3.2.4 Hawrami 55 2.3.2.4.1 Word order 56 2.3.2.4.2 Agreement 59 2.3.2.4.3 Case system 61 2.3.2.5 Kahangi 63 2.3.2.5.1 Word order 63 2.3.2.5.2 Syntax 65 2.3.2.6 Kurdish 69 2.3.2.6.1 Word order 70 2.3.2.6.2 Agreement 74 2.3.2.6.3 Case system 75 2.3.2.7 Lori 76 2.3.2.8 Semnani 81 2.3.2.8.1 Word order 81 2.3.2.9 Tati 86 2.3.2.9.1 Word order 87 2.3.2.9.2 Agreement 90 2.3.2.10 Vafsi 91 2.3.2.10.1 Word order 92 2.3.2.10.2 Agreement 94 2.3.2.10.3 Case System 95 2.3.2.11 Gerashi 97 ii 2.4 The behavior of West Iranian languages toward Dryer’s component in a quick glance 99 Chapter 3: On Modality and More 3.0 Overview 104 3.1 The origin of the study 104 3.2 Review of literature 107 3.2.1 Modality: A Mean for Typological Studies 107 3.2.1.1. Bybee et al. (1994) 107 3.2.1.1.1 agent-oriented modality 107 3.2.1.1.2 Speaker-oriented modality 109 3.2.1.2 Van der Auwera and Plungian (1998) 111 3.2.1.3 Palmer (2001) 114 3.2.1.4 Narrog (2012) 118 3.2.1.5 Nuyts (2005, 2006, 2016 and forthcoming) 123 3.2.1.5.1 Types of Modality: Nuyts (2005, 2006, 2016 and forthcoming) 124 3.2.1.5.1.1 Dynamic modality 124 3.2.1.5.1.2 Deontic modality 127 3.2.1.5.1.3 Epistemic modality 128 3.2.1.5.1.4 Evidentiality 129 3.2.1.5.2. Beyond qualificational hierarchy: directive, volition, and intention 130 3.2.1.5.3. performative vs descriptive 133 3.2.1.5.4. (inter)subjectivity 134 3.3 Modality in Iranian studies 138 3.3.1 Taleghani (2008) 139 iii 3.3.2 Akhlaghi (2007) 141 3.3.3 Rezaei (2009) 143 3.3.4 Moradi (2012) 146 3.3.5 Ilkhanipour (2013) 148 3.3.6 Naghzgouye Kohan and Naghshbandi (2016) 151 3.4 Auxiliary verbs 152 3.5 Grammaticalization 156 3.5.1 Desemanticization 157 3.5.2 Extension 158 3.5.3 Decategorization 159 3.5.4 Erosion 160 3.6 Polysemy 161 3.7 Summary 166 Chapter Four: Empirical Study 4.0 Overview 167 4.1 Methodology 167 4.1.1 Procedure of data collecting 167 4.1.2 Access and shortage 172 4.1.3 Research strategy 173 4.1.4. Research process 174 4.2 Modality: from form to meaning 175 4.2.1 Modal auxiliaries 176 4. 2.1.1 Kahangi 176 4.2.1.1.1 176 4.2.1.1.2 180 iv 4.2.1.1.3 183 4.2.1.1.4 ((person marker) 186 4.2.1.1.5 189 4.2.1.2 Vafsi 191 4.2.1.2.1 191 4.2.1.2.2 194 4.2.1.2.3 197 4.2.1.3 Tati (Takestan dialect) 198 4.2.1.3.1 199 4.2.1.3.2 202 4.2.1.3.3 204 4.2.1.4 Semnani 206 4.2.1.4.1 206 4.2.1.4.2 209 4.2.1.4.3 210 4.2.1.5 Gilaki: Shafti Dialect 212 4.2.1.5.1 212 4.2.1.5.2 214 4.2.1.5.3 217 4.2.1.5.4 219 4.2.1.5.5 221 4.2.1.5.6 224 4.2.1.6 Balochi: West Balochi (Makorrani, Makrani: BamPosh Dialect) 225 4.2.1.6.1 226 v 4.2.6.2 228 4.2.1.7 Lori (Balagariveh Dialect): South-West Branch 229 4.2.1.7.1 229 4.2.1.7.2. 232 4.2.1.7.3 234 4.2.1.8 Hawrami (Uraman Takht/Hawraman Takht): Zaza-Gurani languages 235 4.2.1.8.1. 236 4.2.1.8.2 238 4.2.1.8.3 240 4.2.1.9 Kurdish (Sorani in Sanandaj) 240 4.2.1.9.1 241 4.2.1.9.2 244 4.2.1.9.3 247 4.2.1.9.4 248 4.2.1.10 Gerashi 250 4.2.1.10.1 250 4.2.1.10.2 252 4.2.1.11 Persian 253 4.2.1.11.1 253 4.2.1.11.2. 258 4.2.1.11.3 261 4.2.1.12 Grammaticalization and the origin of modal verbs 264 4.2.1.12.1 Overview 264 vi 4.2.1.12.2 Modals derived from *gahu ‘want’ 265 4.2.1.12.3 Modals deriving from xšāya 272 4.2.1.12.4 Modals evolving from tav- 274 4.2.1.12.5 Modals developing from *upā-aya-ti 275 4.2.1.12.6 Modals derived from bava- 277 4.2.1.12.7 Modals evolved from šava- 278 4.2.1.12.8 Modals evolving from zan/dan 280 4.2.1.12.9 Modals developing from ārīka 281 4.2.1.12.10 Modals derived from 282 4.2.2 Modals adverbs 283 4.2.2.1 Group A: 286 4.2.2.2 Group B: (Probably) (Maybe, Possibly) (Maybe, Possibly) 288 4.2.2.3 Specific modal adverbs in Iranian languages 291 4.2.2.3.1 in Kahangi 291 4.2.2.3.2 (MUST) and (maybe, possibly) in Balochi 293 4.2.2.3.3.
Recommended publications
  • On the Persian Compound Verb

    On the Persian Compound Verb

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by K-State Research Exchange ON THE PERSIAN COMPOUND VERB BRIAN LEANDER O'NEILL B. S., Kansas State University, 1972 A MASTER'S THESIS submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF ARTS Department of Speech KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY Manhattan, Kansas 1978 Approved "by: LO CONTENTS osi C 2- Introduction 1 Preliminaries: Historical 3 Preliminaries: Grammatical 6 The Compound Verb 14 Conclusion 38 Notes 39 Bibliography kh Introduction Many authors have noted the preponderance of what we shall he referring to as compound verb constructions in the Persian language. In fact, the major portion of verbal forms in Persian are compounds, composed of some initial non-verbal element and a second purely verbal element. Perhaps because Persian has not been subjected to intensive analysis these constructions have remained poorly described. The aim of this thesis is to examine the compound verb and to determine its status as an element in the grammar of Persian. 1 In the past few years several analyses of various aspects of Persian have appeared, often employing a transformationally based theoretical framework. 2 Preceding these were a number of normative and descriptive works. Included among the former are the much older works by Hadley (1776), Jones (1771) and an anon- ymous work published in 1790 that was written for the Persian speaker learning English. More recently, Lambton (1966) and Elwell-Sutton (19^3) have written grammars to be employed by students of the language. Additionally, there have been a num- ber of phrase books of the type edited by C.
  • Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Kurmanji Kurdish As

    Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Kurmanji Kurdish As

    Language Specific Peculiarities Document for Kurmanji Kurdish as Spoken in Turkey 1. Special handling of dialects Kurmanji Kurdish is a major branch of modern Kurdish, which belongs to the Iranian group of languages. Kurdish is largely a spoken language with a limited but growing body of modern literature. There are many dialectal varieties of Kurdish spread over a wide area of Turkey, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Armenia and Azerbaijan. There are, in addition, different classifications of Kurdish languages and Kurdish peoples that align dialectal choice with tribal affinity. Linguistic and Kurdish scholars usually describe modern Kurdish as having two closely related major branches: Kurmanji (the northern branch) and Sorani (the southern branch). They are not mutually intelligible (see Thackston (2006) p. vii). The Kurdish Institute summarizes the situation as follows: “Kurdish has two regional standards, namely Kurmanji in Turkey, and Sorani farther east and south. Roughly half of Kurdish speakers live in Turkey.” (see http://www.institutkurde.org/en/ and also http://www.blueglobetranslations.com/about- kurdish-kurmanji-language.html). Within the larger region there are two other languages often associated with ethnic Kurds. These are Dimili (also known as Zazaki) and Gorani. Although sometimes classified as sub-dialects of Kurdish (e.g., Kurdish Language - Britannica Online Encyclopedia), these languages belong to a different group of Iranian languages (see for example, http://kurds_history.enacademic.com/346/Kurmanji). Although Kurmanji Kurdish is spoken across a range of countries, it has the advantage of being spoken by around 60-80% of Kurds and is considered a regional standard. The majority of Kurmanji speakers live in Turkey, making it the ideal country for collection of audio data (see for example, http://linguakurd.blogfa.com/post-106.aspx).
  • Current Issues in Kurdish Linguistics Current Issues in Kurdish Linguistics 1 Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics

    Current Issues in Kurdish Linguistics Current Issues in Kurdish Linguistics 1 Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics

    Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics 1 Songül Gündoğdu, Ergin Öpengin, Geofrey Haig, Erik Anonby (eds.) Current issues in Kurdish linguistics Current issues in Kurdish linguistics 1 Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics Bamberg Studies in Kurdish Linguistics Series Editor: Geofrey Haig Editorial board: Erik Anonby, Ergin Öpengin, Ludwig Paul Volume 1 2019 Current issues in Kurdish linguistics Songül Gündoğdu, Ergin Öpengin, Geofrey Haig, Erik Anonby (eds.) 2019 Bibliographische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deut schen Nationalbibliographie; detaillierte bibliographische Informationen sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.de/ abrufbar. Diese Veröff entlichung wurde im Rahmen des Elite-Maststudiengangs „Kul- turwissenschaften des Vorderen Orients“ durch das Elitenetzwerk Bayern ge- fördert, einer Initiative des Bayerischen Staatsministeriums für Wissenschaft und Kunst. Die Verantwortung für den Inhalt dieser Veröff entlichung liegt bei den Auto- rinnen und Autoren. Dieses Werk ist als freie Onlineversion über das Forschungsinformations- system (FIS; https://fi s.uni-bamberg.de) der Universität Bamberg erreichbar. Das Werk – ausgenommen Cover, Zitate und Abbildungen – steht unter der CC-Lizenz CC-BY. Lizenzvertrag: Creative Commons Namensnennung 4.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0. Herstellung und Druck: Digital Print Group, Nürnberg Umschlaggestaltung: University of Bamberg Press © University of Bamberg Press, Bamberg 2019 http://www.uni-bamberg.de/ubp/ ISSN: 2698-6612 ISBN: 978-3-86309-686-1 (Druckausgabe) eISBN: 978-3-86309-687-8 (Online-Ausgabe) URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:473-opus4-558751 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.20378/irbo-55875 Acknowledgements This volume contains a selection of contributions originally presented at the Third International Conference on Kurdish Linguistics (ICKL3), University of Ams- terdam, in August 2016.
  • NACIL. Sorani Pptx

    NACIL. Sorani Pptx

    Identity Avoidance in Morphology; Evidence from Polyfunctional Clitics of Sorani Kurdish Sahar Taghipour University of Kentucky April 2017 In this study ´ Kurdish and its dialects In this study ´ Kurdish and Its Dialects ´ Polyfunctional Clitics in Sorani Kurdish In this study ´ Kurdish and its dialects ´ Polyfunctional Clitics in Sorani Kurdish ´ Morphological Haplology In this study ´ Kurdish and its dialects ´ What are the polyfunctional clitics in Sorani Kurdish ´ Morphological Haplology ´ Constraint-based Morphology with basic concepts from Optimality Theory (Prince and Smolensky: 1993 ) Kurdish and its dialects ´ Iranian languages are divided into two major branches: Western and Eastern Southwestern (Persian) and Northwestern (Kurdish) ´ Kurdish “Is a cover term for a cluster of northwest Iranian languages and dialects spoken by between 20 and 30 million speakers in a contiguous area of West Iran, North Iraq, eastern Turkey and eastern Syria” (Haig and Opengin: 2015) Northern, Central, and Southern(Windfuhr (2009) “In terms of numbers of speakers and degree of standardization, the two most important Kurdish dialects are Sorani (Central Kurdish) and Kurmanji (Northern Kurdish)” (Haig and Matras: 2002) Where Kurdish is spoken? ´ Northern Kurdish (Kurmanji) They’re mainly in Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and Western Azarbayjan in Iran ´ Central Kurdish (Sorani or Mukri) Some parts in Iraq and Iran (Northwestern, Northeastern, in particular ) ´ Southern Kermanshah and Ilam Province (West and Southwestern part of Iran) Sorani and Its Dialects In this study, I am going to talk in particular about Sorani Kurdish. Its dialects are: Mukriyani Ardalani Garmiani Hawlari Babani Jafi Sorani and Its Dialects In this study, I am going to talk in particular about Sorani Kurdish.
  • Pdf 373.11 K

    Pdf 373.11 K

    Journal of Language and Translation Volume 11, Number 4, 2021 (pp. 1-18) Adposition and Its Correlation with Verb/Object Order in Taleshi, Gilaki, and Tati Based on Dryer’s Typological Approach Farinaz Nasiri Ziba1, Neda Hedayat2*, Nassim Golaghaei3, Andisheh Saniei4 ¹ PhD Candidate of Linguistics, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran ² Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Varamin-Pishva Branch, Islamic Azad University, Varamin, Iran ³ Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran ⁴ Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Roudehen Branch, Islamic Azad University, Roudehen, Iran Received: January 6, 2021 Accepted: May 9, 2021 Abstract This paper is a descriptive-analytic study on the adpositional system in a number of northwestern Iranian languages, namely Taleshi, Gilaki, and Tati, based on Dryer’s typological approach. To this end, the correlation of verb/object order was examined with the adpositional phrase and the results were compared based on the aforesaid approach. The research question investigated the correlation between adposition and verb/object order in each of these three varieties. First, the data collection was carried out through a semi-structured interview that was devised based on a questionnaire including a compilation of 66 Persian sentences that were translated into Taleshi, Gilaki, and Tati during interviews with 10 elderly illiterate and semi-literate speakers, respectively, from Hashtpar, Bandar Anzali, and Rostamabad of the Province of Gilan for each variety. Then, the transcriptions were examined in terms of diversity in adpositions, including two categories of preposition and postposition. The findings of the study indicated a strong correlation between the order of verbs and objects with postpositions.
  • The Iranian Reflexes of Proto-Iranian *Ns

    The Iranian Reflexes of Proto-Iranian *Ns

    The Iranian Reflexes of Proto-Iranian *ns Martin Joachim Kümmel, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena [email protected] Abstract1 The obvious cognates of Avestan tąθra- ‘darkness’ in the other Iranian languages generally show no trace of the consonant θ; they all look like reflexes of *tār°. Instead of assuming a different word formation for the non-Avestan words, I propose a solution uniting the obviously corresponding words under a common preform, starting from Proto-Iranian *taNsra-: Before a sonorant *ns was preserved as ns in Avestan (feed- ing the change of tautosyllabic *sr > *θr) but changed to *nh elsewhere, followed by *anhr > *ã(h)r. A parallel case of apparent variation can be explained similarly, namely Avestan pąsnu- ‘ashes’ and its cog- nates. Finally, the general development of Proto-Indo-Iranian *ns in Iranian and its relative chronology is discussed, including word-final *ns, where it is argued that the Avestan accusative plural of a-stems can be derived from *-āns. Keywords: Proto-Iranian, nasals, sibilant, sound change, variation, chronology 1. Introduction The aim of this paper is to discuss some details of the development of the Proto- Iranian (PIr) cluster *ns in the Iranian languages. Before we proceed to do so, it will be useful to recall the most important facts concerning the history of dental-alveolar sibilants in Iranian. 1) PIr had inherited a sibilant *s identical to Old Indo-Aryan (Sanskrit/Vedic) s from Proto-Indo-Iranian (PIIr) *s. This sibilant changed to Common Iranian (CIr) h in most environments, while its voiced allophone z remained stable all the time.
  • Perceptual Dialectology and GIS in Kurdish 1

    Perceptual Dialectology and GIS in Kurdish 1

    Perceptual Dialectology and GIS in Kurdish 1 Full title: A perceptual dialectological approach to linguistic variation and spatial analysis of Kurdish varieties Main Author: Eva Eppler, PhD, RCSLT, Mag. Phil Reader/Associate Professor in Linguistics Department of Media, Culture and Language University of Roehampton | London | SW15 5SL [email protected] | www.roehampton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0) 20 8392 3791 Co-author: Josef Benedikt, PhD, Mag.rer.nat. Independent Scholar, Senior GIS Researcher GeoLogic Dr. Benedikt Roegergasse 11/18 1090 Vienna, Austria [email protected] | www.geologic.at Short Title: Perceptual Dialectology and GIS in Kurdish Perceptual Dialectology and GIS in Kurdish 2 Abstract: This paper presents results of a first investigation into Kurdish linguistic varieties and their spatial distribution. Kurdish dialects are used across five nation states in the Middle East and only one, Sorani, has official status in one of them. The study employs the ‘draw-a-map task’ established in Perceptual Dialectology; the analysis is supported by Geographical Information Systems (GIS). The results show that, despite the geolinguistic and geopolitical situation, Kurdish respondents have good knowledge of the main varieties of their language (Kurmanji, Sorani and the related variety Zazaki) and where to localize them. Awareness of the more diverse Southern Kurdish varieties is less definitive. This indicates that the Kurdish language plays a role in identity formation, but also that smaller isolated varieties are not only endangered in terms of speakers, but also in terms of their representations in Kurds’ mental maps of the linguistic landscape they live in. Acknowledgments: This work was supported by a Santander and by Ede & Ravenscroft Research grant 2016.
  • A Systematic Ornithological Study of the Northern Region of Iranian Plateau, Including Bird Names in Native Language

    A Systematic Ornithological Study of the Northern Region of Iranian Plateau, Including Bird Names in Native Language

    Available online a t www.pelagiaresearchlibrary.com Pelagia Research Library European Journal of Experimental Biology, 2012, 2 (1):222-241 ISSN: 2248 –9215 CODEN (USA): EJEBAU A systematic ornithological study of the Northern region of Iranian Plateau, including bird names in native language Peyman Mikaili 1, (Romana) Iran Dolati 2,*, Mohammad Hossein Asghari 3, Jalal Shayegh 4 1Department of Pharmacology, School of Medicine, Urmia University of Medical Sciences, Urmia, Iran 2Islamic Azad University, Mahabad branch, Mahabad, Iran 3Islamic Azad University, Urmia branch, Urmia, Iran 4Department of Veterinary Medicine, Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary, Shabestar branch, Islamic Azad University, Shabestar, Iran ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT A major potation of this study is devoted to presenting almost all main ornithological genera and species described in Gilanprovince, located in Northern Iran. The bird names have been listed and classified according to the scientific codes. An etymological study has been presented for scientific names, including genus and species. If it was possible we have provided the etymology of Persian and Gilaki native names of the birds. According to our best knowledge, there was no previous report gathering and describing the ornithological fauna of this part of the world. Gilan province, due to its meteorological circumstances and the richness of its animal life has harbored a wide range of animals. Therefore, the nomenclature system used by the natives for naming the animals, specially birds, has a prominent stance in this country. Many of these local and dialectal names of the birds have been entered into standard language of the country (Persian language). The study has presented majority of comprehensive list of the Gilaki bird names, categorized according to the ornithological classifications.
  • M. Witzel (2003) Sintashta, BMAC and the Indo-Iranians. a Query. [Excerpt

    M. Witzel (2003) Sintashta, BMAC and the Indo-Iranians. a Query. [Excerpt

    M. Witzel (2003) Sintashta, BMAC and the Indo-Iranians. A query. [excerpt from: Linguistic Evidence for Cultural Exchange in Prehistoric Western Central Asia] (to appear in : Sino-Platonic Papers 129) Transhumance, Trickling in, Immigration of Steppe Peoples There is no need to underline that the establishment of a BMAC substrate belt has grave implications for the theory of the immigration of speakers of Indo-Iranian languages into Greater Iran and then into the Panjab. By and large, the body of words taken over into the Indo-Iranian languages in the BMAC area, necessarily by bilingualism, closes the linguistic gap between the Urals and the languages of Greater Iran and India. Uralic and Yeneseian were situated, as many IIr. loan words indicate, to the north of the steppe/taiga boundary of the (Proto-)IIr. speaking territories (§2.1.1). The individual IIr. languages are firmly attested in Greater Iran (Avestan, O.Persian, Median) as well as in the northwestern Indian subcontinent (Rgvedic, Middle Vedic). These materials, mentioned above (§2.1.) and some more materials relating to religion (Witzel forthc. b) indicate an early habitat of Proto- IIr. in the steppes south of the Russian/Siberian taiga belt. The most obvious linguistic proofs of this location are the FU words corresponding to IIr. Arya "self-designation of the IIr. tribes": Pre-Saami *orja > oarji "southwest" (Koivulehto 2001: 248), ārjel "Southerner", and Finnish orja, Votyak var, Syry. ver "slave" (Rédei 1986: 54). In other words, the IIr. speaking area may have included the S. Ural "country of towns" (Petrovka, Sintashta, Arkhaim) dated at c.
  • Voice and Transitivity in Complex Predicates in Iranian Agnes Korn

    Voice and Transitivity in Complex Predicates in Iranian Agnes Korn

    Looking for the Middle Way: Voice and Transitivity in Complex Predicates in Iranian Agnes Korn To cite this version: Agnes Korn. Looking for the Middle Way: Voice and Transitivity in Complex Predicates in Iranian . Lingua, Elsevier, 2013, Special Issue: Complex Predicates, 135, pp. 30-55. 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.015. halshs-01340632 HAL Id: halshs-01340632 https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01340632 Submitted on 1 Jul 2016 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - NoDerivatives| 4.0 International License [NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Lingua. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. A definitive version was subsequently published in Lingua 135, pp. 30-55, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.015] Looking for the Middle Way: Voice and Transitivity in Complex Predicates in Iranian * Agnes Korn Abstract This article explores the emergence of complex predicates in Persian with a focus on voice and transitivity.
  • The Caspian Language of Šahmirzād

    The Caspian Language of Šahmirzād

    The Caspian Language of Šahmirzād Habib BORJIAN Columbia University Located in the Semnān area (midway between Tehran and Khorasan), the town of Šahmirzād and its neighboring villages are home to speakers of Šahmirzādi, a ver- nacular sharply differing from the other language types spoken in the Semnān area but closely related to the Mazandarani language spoken across the Alborz range to the north, along the Caspian coast. This article studies Šahmirzādi phonology, grammar, and vocabulary, with a look at cross-linguistic influence in the situation of language contact. The article concludes with a discussion of the possible status of Šahmirzādi as a separate language within the Caspian family. 1. INTRODUCTION The township of Šahmirzād (locally Šâmerzâ) sprawls along the southern slopes of the Alborz range, 15 miles north of Semnān, at 35.8° north latitude, 53.3° east longitude, and 2,000 meters above sea level. Two parallel mountain ridges separate Šahmirzād, which is in the Semnān district, from Dodānga and Savādkuh districts of the Mazandaran (Māzandarān) province. Downslope from Šahmirzād lie Sangesar and Semnān, each with its distinct Ira- nian language, forming a Sprachbund with the nearby Sorxaʾi, Lāsgerdi, and Aftari, all of which are crowded into the district of Semnān. The permanent population of the township of Šahmirzād, recorded as 7,273 individuals in the 2006 and 8,882 in 2011 censuses, swells significantly in summers upon the return of the residents who work elsewhere. The villages located in the valleys on the north of Šahmirzād, including Deh Ṣufiān, Āserān, Jāšm, and Garm Čašma, speak varieties of Šahmirzādi.
  • Internal Classification of Indo-European Languages: Survey

    Internal Classification of Indo-European Languages: Survey

    Václav Blažek (Masaryk University of Brno, Czech Republic) On the internal classification of Indo-European languages: Survey The purpose of the present study is to confront most representative models of the internal classification of Indo-European languages and their daughter branches. 0. Indo-European 0.1. In the 19th century the tree-diagram of A. Schleicher (1860) was very popular: Germanic Lithuanian Slavo-Lithuaian Slavic Celtic Indo-European Italo-Celtic Italic Graeco-Italo- -Celtic Albanian Aryo-Graeco- Greek Italo-Celtic Iranian Aryan Indo-Aryan After the discovery of the Indo-European affiliation of the Tocharian A & B languages and the languages of ancient Asia Minor, it is necessary to take them in account. The models of the recent time accept the Anatolian vs. non-Anatolian (‘Indo-European’ in the narrower sense) dichotomy, which was first formulated by E. Sturtevant (1942). Naturally, it is difficult to include the relic languages into the model of any classification, if they are known only from several inscriptions, glosses or even only from proper names. That is why there are so big differences in classification between these scantily recorded languages. For this reason some scholars omit them at all. 0.2. Gamkrelidze & Ivanov (1984, 415) developed the traditional ideas: Greek Armenian Indo- Iranian Balto- -Slavic Germanic Italic Celtic Tocharian Anatolian 0.3. Vladimir Georgiev (1981, 363) included in his Indo-European classification some of the relic languages, plus the languages with a doubtful IE affiliation at all: Tocharian Northern Balto-Slavic Germanic Celtic Ligurian Italic & Venetic Western Illyrian Messapic Siculian Greek & Macedonian Indo-European Central Phrygian Armenian Daco-Mysian & Albanian Eastern Indo-Iranian Thracian Southern = Aegean Pelasgian Palaic Southeast = Hittite; Lydian; Etruscan-Rhaetic; Elymian = Anatolian Luwian; Lycian; Carian; Eteocretan 0.4.