Modal Forms for Permission in Gilaki: A Historical Approach

In Gilaki, four forms are used to express permission: vâhâštǝn, bedâ, benǝ and tânǝstǝn. Some of these forms indicate the issuance of permission and some indicate the request for permission. These forms are the result of the grammaticalization of the forms that had lexical functions in the old periods of Iranian languages. In this article, the process of grammaticalization of the grams which represent permission has been investigated based on the data from Avestan, Old Persian, Middle Persian, and Persian literary texts. In most languages, permission is represented either through the grammaticalization of verbs that imply abandoning and leaving or through the grammaticalization of verbs that imply the concept of ability and are also used to express probability. In the Gilaki, the forms vâhâštǝn and bedâ, from the root harz / hard, which means "to leave", survived in the old period of Iranian languages. Benǝ, from the infinitive nehan, in addition to the lexical meaning of "putting", was used in a stage of language evolution to express the meaning of "leaving" and then its imperative verb was grammaticalized to express the concept of permission. Tânǝstǝn is also from the root tav meaning "to be able" in the old period of Iranian languages. This form in the course of evolution, in addition to the modal concept of ability, is also used to express possibility and permission.
 
Extended Abstract
1. Introduction
Expression of permission is one of the modalities which is represented in Gilaki by vâhâštǝn, bedâ, benǝ and tânǝstǝn. In this paper, we intend to examine these linguistic forms from the grammaticalization point of view, and by using the diachronic data of Iranian languages.
 
2. Theoretical framework
According to Bybee (1994), there are two ways to express the concept of permission diachronically: first, the grammaticalization of the verbs that mean "to allow" and "to have permission", and second, the development of the verbs which imply physical and mental ability into root possibility and then into the concept of permission. During the process of development, the concept of ability includes all external and internal conditions that make the occurrence of things possible and all the social and physical conditions that enable or allow the agent and the speaker to do something. In addition, in many languages of the world, the verbs which mean "to leave", and "to abandon", have developed into forms to express permission.
 
3. Methodology
Gilaki data for permission requests and permit issuance is provided by the field method, and based on the linguistic intuition of one of the authors. By using data from Avestan, Old Persian, Middle Persian and post-Islamic Persian literary texts, we have shown what functions the forms of expressing the concept of permission have had in the past periods of Iranian languages and what changes they have gone through to become grammatical tools for expressing permission in Gilaki.
 
4. Results & Discussion
Vâhâštǝn is composed of the prefix vā- and the infinitive hâštǝn, which means "to put", "to leave", "to abandon" and "to allow" and its present stem is vâhal-. Hâštǝn is the residual from the harz/hard root, in old Persian and Avestan, which means "to leave", or "to abandon". In Middle Persian and Persian literary texts, hišt and its present stem hil-, are used to indicate abandoning and leaving objective and abstract things and also the process of doing things. Using the verb in contexts where abandoning something is done to achieve a specific goal, has gradually caused the verb to lose its original meaning, abandon, and acquire the meaning of permission. In the majority of middle Persian sentences, the action that is permitted to be done through the use of the verb hištan, or the specific purpose for which the use of hištan, allows its fulfilment or non-fulfilment, is presented in the form of complete and non-complete infinitives. In Persian literary texts, hištan is used pre-verbally, within a subordinate clause and with a conjunction. In Gilaki, the conjunction has been removed from the beginning of the subordinate clause and vâhâštǝn is used both to issue permits and to request permission.
Bedâ is another form in Gilaki for asking permission. This form is obtained through phonological reduction and the loss of morpheme boundary in the phrase *be hel tâ. The infinitive nehan, means, "to put something somewhere", "to permit" and "to abandon". Bene, the imperative form with the prefix be, is used for asking permission.
Bene, the imperative form with the prefix be, is used for asking permission. In the old period of Iranian languages this verb, from the root dā and the prefix ni-, is used to mean "put something somewhere". In middle Persian, both the present stem nih- and the past stem nihād are used with the same meaning. In Persian literary texts, nihadan, without locative adverbs means, "to abandon", "to leave", and sometimes "to leave alone, to give up", is used with the conjunction tâ and a subordinate clause. Abandoning and leaving something when it is done to accomplish a task or achieve a specific goal, has caused the interpretation of allowing and asking for permission in the mind of the language speakers. In Gilaki bene is used to represent asking for permission by moving to the initial position of the sentence and removing the conjunction.
Tânǝstǝn simultaneously represents the concepts of physical and mental ability, possibility and permission. This verb is a residual of the root tav in old Persian and Avestan, which means "to have the ability ". In middle Persian, tuwān and tuwānist have been common to denote the concept of physical and mental ability. Ability also implies the concept of possibility. The ability to do something is the possibility and probability of its occurrence. Therefore, the concept of the ability to do something also implies the possibility of its realization. In middle Persian tuwān, in some contexts especially in interrogative contexts has represented permission. In these contexts, tuwān describes a condition in which the agent or the speaker can do something. Gradually, with the expansion of the use of this verb to express such concepts in Gilaki, tânǝstǝn is used to issue and request permission.
 
5. Conclusion & Suggestions
The forms of expressing modal concepts in all languages have emerged through the grammaticalization of two lexical forms, the first of which are the verbs which mean "to abandon", and "to leave". Vâhâštǝn, bedâ and benǝ are such verbs. Bedâ and vâhâštǝn the residual forms from the root harz/hard, lose their lexical meanings and are only used grammatically. The lexical meaning and grammatical function of nehan coexist with each other. This verb, from the root da and with the prefix ni-, originally meant "to put" and then has obtained the meaning of "to abandon", and in Gilaki, its imperative form has been used to express permission. The second way of representing the concept of permission is verbs that imply the concept of ability and are used in a stage of development to express the concept of possibility. In Gilaki tânǝstǝn a residual form of the root tav is used to express ability, possibility and permission.
 
Selected Bibliography
Abualqasemi, M. 1994. Stems of Dari Persian Verbs, Tehran: Ghoghnus. [In Persian]
Bartholomae, C. 1961. Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Berlin: W. De Gruyter.
Brunner, Ch. j. 1977. A Syntax of Western Middle Iranian. Delmar, New York: Caravan Books.
Bybee, J. L., Perkins R. D. & Pagliuca, W.  1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect, and Modality in the Languages of the World. Vol. 196. Chicago: University Press.
Bybee, J. L. and Fleischman, S. 1995. “Modality in grammar and discourse”. In Bybee, J. L. and S. Fleischman (eds), Modality in grammar and discourse, 1-17, Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Heine, B. 2003. “Grammaticalization”. In B.D. Joseph & R.D. Janda (eds.). The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, 575-601. Blackwell Publishing.
Heine, B. & T. Kuteva. 2004. World Lexicon of Grammaticalization. Cambridge: University Press.
Hopper, P. J. 1991. “On Some Principle of Grammaticalization”. In E. C. Traugott and C. Heine (eds.). Approaches to Grammaticalization, 1/17-35. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins publishing company.
Hopper, P.J. & Traugott, E.C. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: University Press.
Rastorgueva, V.S., Kerimova, A.A., Mamedzade, A.K., Pireiko, L.A. & Edel’man, D.I. 2012. The Gilaki Language. Uppsala: University Press.