The Typology of Modality in Modern West Iranian Languages
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
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.