Comparing Mental Models of Persian Speakers with that of Azarbaijani Turkish Speakers (A Case Study of Compound Infinitives)

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Payam-e Noor University

2 PhD Student, Payam-e Noor University

Abstract

Persian and Azarbaijani Turkish have been located in close contact with each other during centuries, so it is natural that language contacts between them have been conducted. This research is going to reply to two questions: First, whether during these contacts mental models of speakers of the two languages have been closed to each other. Second, whether the mental tableaux model proposed by Johnson -Laird (1983) is suitable enough to compare mental models of speakers of the two languages. To do this, the authors of this study have tried to compare mental models of speakers of the standard Persian with Miyandoab dialect (an Azarbaijani Turkish dialect). The required data were collected using both content and field study. In the first step, 234 compound infinitives with main infinitive components of "eating, beating, drawing and catching" were collected from standard Persian. In the second step, the compound infinitives were given to the twenty Azarbaijani Turkish informants in order to write down their equivalents in Azarbaijani Turkish. Then, the necessary tableaux were drawn. At last, mental models of speakers of the two languages were compared with each other using mental tableaux model proposed by Johnson - Lord (1983). The results were: First, there were many resemblances between mental models of speakers of Persian and Azarbaijani Turkish although the mental models of the first one were more complex than the other. Of course Azarbaijani Turkish informants frequently tended to use simple infinitives. Second, the mental tableaux model proposed by Johnson - Laird (1983) was not suitable enough to compare mental models of speakers of the two languages.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

عمید، حسن (1389). فرهنگ فارسی عمید، چاپ اول. تهران: انتشارات راه رشد.
معین، محمد (1387).  فرهنگ فارسی معین، چاپ چهاردهم. تهران: انتشارات معین.
وندحسینی، مینا (1390).  تکیه در زبان ­ترکی ­آذربایجانی. پایان­نامۀ کارشناسی ­ارشد زبان‌شناسی. دانشگاه علامه ­طباطبایی.
Craik, K. (1943). The nature of explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garman, M. (1990). Psycholinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Garrett, M. F. (1988). Processes in Language Production. In: F. J. Newmeyer (Ed.), Language: Psychological and Biological Aspects (pp. 69-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kosslyn, S. M. (1980). Image and Mind. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Paivio, A. (1971). Imagery and Verbal Processes. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1973). What the Mind's Eye Tells the Mind's Brain: A Critique of Mental Imagery. Psychological Bulletin, 80: 1-24.
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1981). The Imagery Debate: Analogue Media Versus Tacit Knowledge. Psychological Review, 88(1), 16-45.
Holmqvist, K. (1999). Conceptual Engineering: Implementing Cognitive Semantics. In: J. Allwood and P. Gärdenfors (Eds.), Cognitive Semantics: Meaning and Cognition (pp. 153-171). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics