نشریه پژوهشهای زبانشناسی (May 2021)
Syntactic, Semantic, and Pragmatic Representations of Adjacent Verbs in Persian Language: An Analysis Based on Role and Reference Grammar (RRG)
Abstract
AbstractIn our ordinary and everyday speech and in the informal and colloquial contexts in general, we encounter the use of constructions, in which two verbs appear in a “verb-verb” situation, thus making a complex predicate construction, such as "kešid bordeš", "gereft xabid", and "daram miravam". All these three constructions have a common feature of adjacency of verbs, in which one verb has a matrix function and the other has a dependent function. Thus, in the present study, they were studied under the title of "adjacent verbs". The authors believed that the “Role and Reference Grammar (RRG)” would provide a useful theoretical framework for better understanding of the “construction of adjacent verbs”. In RRG, all linguistic constructions are explained in three dimensions: syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic (focus structure). Accordingly, in the present paper, we first classified the different types of adjacent verbs and then discussed their features. It starts by identifying the syntactic, semantic, and focus structure representations will be discussed and then, the constructional scheme of adjacent verbs in Persian will be represented. Keywords: Adjacent Verbs, Adverb-Like Verbs, Aspectual Verbs, Constructional Scheme, Nuclear Juncture, Role And Reference Grammar (RRG) Introduction In Persian, we face sentences, in which two verbs are placed next to each other and together form a single predicate. Such constructions are seen in colloquial Persian and informal writing.1) Bače parid raft tu hayat.Lit: The baby jumped went to the yard.2) Xune ro foruxtam raft.Lit: I sold the house went.3) Daštam Hafez mixundam.I was studying Hafez.In the present article, we intended to explain these constructions and put all of them under the title of "adjacent verbs". The reason for this naming was that the first feature of such constructions was juxtaposition or proximity of two verbs that together formed a single predicate. We believed that the Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) with its capabilities could be used as a suitable theoretical framework for describing and analyzing structures containing adjacent verbs. Accordingly, the present study sought to answer the following questions:What linguistic features do adjacent verbs have and how are they classified?What are the syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic representations of the construction of adjacent verbs? Materials and MethodsThe data of the present study were prepared based on the sentences in the book of "Persian Colloquial Dictionary", screenplays, story books, examples in other researches, and linguists’ ordinary and everyday speech. Machine-readable versions, such as PDFs and e-books available in computer programs, were used to facilitate the data collection (if available). The criterion of searching was combination of two verbs. Finally, the target structures were extracted manually. Discussion of results and ConclusionBased on the data, we divided adjacent verbs into three types:a) adverb-like verbs4) Qapid bordeš.Lit: He grabbed took it.b) aspectual lexical verbs5) Gereftam xabidam.Lit: I got slept.c) aspectual auxiliary verbs6) Daštam mixundam.Lit: I was reading. In the following, all the above-mentioned three types of sentences were studied based on features like united event, shared argument, existence or absence of a linker, and lexical features of a dependent verb. The results of this study showed that all the three types of construction of adjacent verbs referred to a single (united) event and necessarily shared arguments, while there was no linker between them. The dependent verb in the first type acted as an adverb for the matrix verb; in the second type, it behaved like an aspectual element; and in the third type, it was just an auxiliary, which represented some grammatical features. Syntactic representationWe believed that in ADC, there was a single core containing two nuclei that took a single set of core arguments. In the first type (adverb-like verb), there were two nuclei, each of which occurred with its own imperfective (mi-) aspect operator leading to nuclear coordination.7) Zahra mi-david mi-raft piše mamaneš.Lit: Zahra was going to her Mum while running.In the second type, the dependent verb expressed an aspectual feature for the matrix verb. In (), the verb “gereft” showed an inchoative phase of event (xabid) and yielded nuclear ad-subordination.8) Gereft xabid.Lit: He started to sleep.In the third type, the dependent verb was auxiliary, which represented the tense, aspect, and illocutionary force operators.9) Daštam dars mixundam.I was studying my lessons. Semantic representationThe first type of ADC had a simple clause with a logical structure:(paridan´ (do´ (bače, [raftan´ (bače)] & INGR be-at´ (hayɑt, bače))The third type had an auxiliary:IFDEC<TNSPST<ASPPROG﴾ do´ (Zahra, [raftan´ (Zahra)])﴿﴿However, for the second type, we proposed a logical structure like:V1: gozaštan<ASPgozaštan [narahat´ (do´ (Ahmad, [raftan´ (Ahmad)]]))V2:raftannarahat´ (do´ (Ahmad, [raftan´ (Ahmad)]))V1+V2: gozaštan raftan(80). narahat´ (do´ (Ahmad, [<ASPgozaštan raftan´ (Ahmad)])) Focus structureIn the focus structure representation, the illocutionary force played an important role. In ADC, there is a simple clause and IF operator has the whole clause in its scope. Accordingly, the potential focus domain is the whole clause. We predicted that the actual focus domain was on the predicate and its argument, which was called the predicate focus. According to the issues raised in the previous sections, the authors proposed a structural scheme of adjacent verbs in Persian language based on the RRG.
Keywords
