By Anousha Sedighi
Contract regulations in Persian is the 1st accomplished try to take on the difficulty of verbal contract in Persian from a cross-linguistic perspective. Persian is a box of analysis inside theoretical linguistics that's but to be sufficiently explored. This ebook adopts Chomsky's Minimalist software that's on the vanguard of contemporary theories of formal syntax, and applies it to the Persian language. even though it is usually believed that during Persian the verb consents with the topic, numerous structures appear to constrain this compulsory rule. Adopting the framework of allotted Morphology, the writer argues that contract is actually acquired with the plural inanimate topics yet a morphological rule may perhaps block the outcome. in contrast to the former analyses which think of the experiencer because the topic of the mental structures, the writer argues that the mental country is the topic of the sentence. The findings of this booklet not just give a contribution to raised figuring out of Persian syntax, but additionally have very important implications for grammar conception.
Read or Download Agreement Restrictions in Persian PDF
Best language & grammar books
Latin is likely one of the significant old Indo-European languages and one of many cornerstones of Indo-European reviews. because the final entire etymological dictionary of Latin seemed in 1959, huge, immense growth has been made within the reconstruction of Proto-Indo-European, and lots of etymologies were revised.
Dependent-Head Synthesis in Nivkh has been presented a prize of the Offermann-Hergarten Donation on the college of Cologne in 2004. The endowments are granted for impressive leading edge and comprehensibly documented examine. This booklet bargains an cutting edge method of 3 interlaced issues: a scientific research of the morphosyntatic association of Nivkh (Paleosiberian); a cross-linguistic research of complicated noun varieties (parallel to complicated (polysynthetic) verb forms); and a typology of polysynthesis.
The aim of this quantity is to make extra available, for using researchers and scholars within the box of pidgins and creoles, shows of the 3rd foreign convention on Pidgins and Creoles in Honolulu, 1975, facing English-based creoles. apart from their documentary worth, the 10 papers of this quantity are of curiosity for numerous purposes: they include attention-grabbing info and observations at the languages themselves, specifically Trinidadian Creole, Guyanese Creole, St.
- The Folk Classification of Ceramics. A Study Of Cognitive Prototypes
- Comparative perspectives on language acquisition : a tribute to Clive Perdue
- Agency and Patronage in Eastern Translatology
- Language Complexity: Typology, contact, change
- Variationstypologie Variation Typology: A Typological Handbook of European Languages
Additional resources for Agreement Restrictions in Persian
For solving the mystery of quirky subjects and the Icelandic person restriction, Sigur~sson (2001) proposes a featural relationship between the quirky subject and the 'finite complex,' namely, Person Matching. As described before, the situation is that the finite verb agrees with the 3m person nominative object and not with the 1ot and 2m person objects. He considers two projections for Person and Nmnber each. He argues the following: (a) the 3m person is not 'true' person and hence agreement for the 3m person nominative object only involves number agreement; (b) the dative subject enters into a default/3m person 'null agreement' with the person head of a finite verb.
24 Anicmacy and Agreement Restriction (47) okkur hefur/*hofum verid kalt UsDat has38 gt*have;p1 been cold We have been cold Sigurasson (2001:85) lll) If there is another argument involved in the object position. then agreement depends on the case of the object. a) If the case of the argument in the object position is in the dative/accusative/genitive, then no agreement occurs. Examples are as in (48-49). Gen (49) Mig van tar penning Me Ace lacks. Default money Ace Ilackmoney Yip et al. e. the 1• and 2nd person nominative objects are not possible and are blocked from the controlling agreement (Sigurasson.
Those in (100-101c), where the subject has clearly become specific, are still worse. This judgment was not supported by native speaker audiences of the Iranian linguistics conference (2005, Leipzig, Germany) who could use all the forms presented in (100-101). The fact that all three options are acceptable indicates that the specificity of inanimate subjects does not 47 Chapter] affect agreement. Another piece of evidence to show that specificity does not affect agreement is presented in (102) in which the plural inanimate subject in lebm-ha (these clothes) is undoubtedly in specific form, yet the verbal agreement is constrained and the verb appears with a default morphology.