Comparing Syntactic Structure and Linear Order of Persian Verbal Inflectional Categories within the Framework of Distributed Morphology

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. of Linguistics, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

2 Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Human Sciences, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

3 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Human Sciences, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran.

Abstract

The present descriptive-analytic article is aimed to study and compare the syntactic structure and linear order of Persian verbal inflectional categories within the framework of Distributed Morphology (DM) (Halle & Marantz, 1993). First we suppose the syntactic hierarchical position of functional categories and clause syntactic structure of Persian to be what Taleghani (2008) proposes. Then based on the post syntactic operations such as, “lowering” and “local dislocation” and what Embick (2015) proposes for linearization of constituents within the framework of DM, syntactic and linear position of verbal compounds in present, past and future tenses are compared. Finally, any mismatches between the two structures are explained through the two post syntactic operations. Research findings showed that “negation morpheme”, compared to other morphemes, mismatches much more in the syntactic and linear structures and requires more explanations in post syntactic component. It is concluded that this morpheme at post-syntactic component, lowers and prefixes mostly to vp and in some cases to aspect and auxiliary morphemes.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Chomsky, N. & Halle Mo. )1968(. The sound pattern of english. New York: Harper & Row.
Cinque, G. (2017). A microparametric approach to the head-initial /head-final parameter. Linguistic Analysis. 41, 309-366
Darzi, A. & Boroujerdi, H. (2016). Free word order of verb and its arguments. Journal of linguistic Research. 6(2). 21-40 (In Persian)..
Embick, D. & Noyer, R. (2001). Movement operations after syntax, Linguistic Inquiry 32 (4), 555-595.
Embick, D. & Noyer, R. (2007). Distributed morphology and the syntax/morphology interface, in G. Ramchand & C. Reiss, (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Interfaces, Oxford University Press, 289-324.
Embick, D. (2007b). Linearization and local dislocation: Derivational mechanics and interactions, Linguistic Analysis, 33 (3-4), 303-336.
Embick, D. (2015). The morpheme, a theoretical introduction. University of Pennsylvania.
Fox, D. & Pesetsky, D. (2005). Cyclic linearization of syntactic structure. Theoretical Linguistics, 31 (1-2), 1-45.
Halle, M. & Marantz, A. (1993). Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. In Kenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (Eds.), The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass. 53-110.
Hosseini-Maasoum. M. (2011). The function of negation category in the syntactic analysis of Persian. An account of negation process. Journal of Linguistics & Khorasan Dialects, 3(5). Pp. 17-34. (In Persian).
Karimi, S. (2005). A minimalist approach to scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Marantz, A. (1997). No escape from syntax: Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In Demetriadis (Ed.) Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, Pennsylvania State University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 201-225.
Pfau, R. (2009). Grammar as Processor: A Distributed Morphology account of speech errors. Amesterdam: John Benjamins.
Pollock, J. Y. (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry, 20 (3), 365-424.
Saab, A., Lipták, A. (2016). Movement and deletion after syntax: Licensing by inflection reconsidered. Studia Linguistica, 70 (1). 66-108.
Taleghani, A. (2008). The interaction of modality, aspect and negation in Persian. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamin’s Publishing.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics