حروف‌اضافه در زبان شهمیرزادی: ابزاری برای حالت‌دهی به گروه‌های اسمی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار زبان‌شناسی، پژوهشگاه میراث فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

2 دانشیار زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه میراث فرهنگی و گردشگری، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

در پژوهش حاضر شیوۀ حالت‌نمایی و نقش حروف‌اضافه در نشانه‌گذاری حالت در زبان شهمیرزادی بررسی شده‌است. برای تحلیل داده‌های زبانی براساس چارچوب نظری پژوهش، از داده‌های پرسشنامۀ تهیه‌شده برای این کار و همچنین داده‌های شهمیرزادی در پایگاه داده‌های اطلس زبانی ایران بهره گرفته شده‌است. علاوه‌براین برای تدقیق و محک داده‌ها، از منابع مکتوبِ مرتبط که دارای اطلاعات واژگانی و نحوی هستند، استفاده گردیده‌است. تحلیل داده‌ها نشان می‌دهد که در هر دو نوع حالتِ دستوری و معنایی در این زبان نشانه‌گذاری حالت با حروف‌اضافه صورت می‌گیرد. حروف‌اضافه در شهمیرزادی از نوع پس‌اضافه هستند و نشانه‌گذاری حالت در این زبان از نوع تحلیلی است و از وندهای تصریفی استفاده نمی‌شود. به عبارت دیگر در این گونۀ زبانی حالت‌های مکانی، همراهی، ابزاری و ازی با حروف‌اضافۀ وابسته یا مستقل و از سوی دیگر حالت‌های اضافی، به/ برایی، مفعولی و ازی (در صورتی که از صورت قدیمیِ /ǰǝn-/ استفاده شود) با حروف اضافة وابسته (پی‌بست) نشان داده می‌شوند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Adpositions in Shahmirzadi Language: Tools for Case Marking in Noun Phrases

نویسندگان [English]

  • Marziye Sanaati 1
  • Pooneh Mostafavi 2
1 Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran
2 Associate Professor of Linguistics, Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]

The relationships between the head and its dependent nouns are determined through case-marking systems. This study examines the method and role of adpositions in case marking in the Shahmirzadi language which is spoken in the Semnan province of Iran. To analyze the linguistic data based on the theoretical framework of the research, data were collected through a questionnaire prepared for this purpose, and Shahmirzadi data available in the Iran Linguistic Atlas (ILA) database have been utilized. Written sources containing lexical and syntactic information were also used to refine and validate the data. The data analysis indicates that in both grammatical and semantic cases in Shahmirzadi, case marking is achieved through postpositions. According to the theoretical framework, the case-marking system in this language is analytical, and inflectional affixes are not used for this purpose. In other words, in this language variety, the locative, comitative, instrumental, and ablative cases are marked using independent or dependent adpositions. But genitive, benefactive, accusative and ablative (where the older Shahmirzadi form /-ǰǝn/ involves) cases are marked through dependent adpositions (enclitics).
 
Extended abstract
1.Introduction
Case, is the marking of the relationship between the head and the dependent in a noun phrase. From a typological point of view, there are two types of case marking in languages: inflectional and analytical. In the first type, case marking is done through inflectional categories, while in the second, it is carried out using independent categories (Primus, 2012: 305).
There are various methods for case marking in languages, which are discussed in the theoretical framework section. In some languages, case marking is done through adpositions, while in others it is done with inflectional suffixes. Additionally, in some languages around the world, both methods are used together. According to Blake (2004: 47), the use of syntactic word order can also be considered a competing mechanism for indicating grammatical case.
Given the necessity of studying local languages in Iran to preserve and maintain them on the one hand, and the importance of research on how case marking works in languages as part of syntactic-typological studies on the other, this research addresses the method of case marking in the Shahmirzadi language based on Blake (2004).
Researchers such as Rogova (1999), Lecoq (2004), Kalbasi (2009), Dabirmoghaddam (2023), and other linguists have conducted various studies on this language and its linguistic issues. However, none of these studies have addressed the aforementioned topic in Shahmirzadi. Therefore, the present research aims to fill this gap by examining the research topic. To achieve this goal, the subject will investigate nominative, accusative, locative, dative, ablative, comitative, instrumental, and genitive cases in the data of this language.
2.Theoretical Framework
In inflectional case marking systems, case markers appear as affixes on noun phrases, which, depending on their position, can be prefixes, suffixes, or infixes. Prepositions can also function as case markers in languages, and such a system is called an analytical case marking system. For instance, in Japanese, grammatical cases are indicated through postpositions. In languages where the analytical method of case marking is used, adpositions (whether preposition, postposition, or both) are employed. In some languages like Turkish and Latin, the case marking is synthetic. This means that case suffixes and postpositions perform the function of case marking in these languages (Blake, 2004: 9). Primus (2012) believes that case marking can occur on both the dependent and the head elements. If the markers are placed on the head, the process is referred to as head-marking; if they attach to the dependent, it is called dependent-marking (Blake, 2004, citing Nichols, 1986).
Blake (2004: 31), in addition to categorizing case as analytical and synthetic cases, which were discussed in the previous paragraphs, also refers to two groups of cases: grammatical cases and semantic cases. Grammatical cases, or syntactic cases as they are sometimes called, only express grammatical relations. Nominative, accusative, and often genitive cases fall into this group. He also adds dative and ergative cases to this category because they encode the indirect object and the agent of a transitive verb (A), respectively. On the other hand, semantic cases express semantic relations, such as locative, source, comitative, instrumental, and ablative cases. However, this categorization is not always clear-cut, and sometimes ambiguity is observed in languages.
3.Research Method
This research employs a descriptive-analytical method, gathering data through interviews with native speakers of the Shahmirzadi language using a specifically designed questionnaire. Additionally, it utilizes data from the Linguistic Atlas of Semnan Province. The Iranian Linguistic Atlas is currently being compiled at the Research Institute of Cultural Heritage and Tourism. In certain instances, written sources about this language have been consulted to refine and validate the data. The research corpus comprises 200 sentences or phrases; due to the article's length constraints, not all can be presented. After transcription using the North American Phonetic Alphabet (NAPA/APA) system, the data are analyzed based on the research's theoretical framework.
4.Conclusion
Based on data analysis and according to Blake's classification, the case marking system in Shahmirzadi language is analytical. This means that in this language case marking is performed through adposition rather than inflectional affixes. In the Shahmirzadi, adpositions are in postposition type and are used in both independent (dim) and dependent (-væri) forms. In this language variety, locative, comitative, instrumental, and ablative cases are marked using either independent or dependent postpositions and genitive, dative, and accusative cases are indicated through dependent postpositions (enclitics). Notably, in the ablative case, if the original and older Shahmirzadi form /-ǰǝn/ is used, it also involves enclitics. The term "independent" for some Shahmirzadi postpositions means that, in addition to their role as postpositions, they function as meaningful lexical units. For example, "dim" is used to mean both "on" and "face."
Another point is that in the Shahmirzadi, the adposition "az" (meaning "from") is occasionally used, likely due to linguistic contact and borrowing from Standard Persian. In Standard Persian the said adposition is used as preposition, whereas in original and older form of Shahmirzadi it functions as a postposition.
Select Biblography
Blake, B.J. Case .2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. 
Butt, M. Theories of Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Dabir Moghaddam, M. Typology of iranian Languages. (2nd Ed.). samt Organization Press, 2024
Hewson, J. & V. Bubenik. From Case to Adposition: The development of Configurational Syntax in Indo-European Languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2006.
Kristensen, A. Semnan Dialect. Translated By: Ebrahimian, E. and H. Hasanzadeh Tavakkoli, Semnan: Semnan University Press, 2010.
Lecoq, P. “Caspian Dialects and the Dialects of Northwestern Iran”. In Rüdiger Schmitt (ed.). Compendium of Iranian Languages”. Translated by Arman Bakhtiyari et al. Vol. 2. Tehran: Qoqnoos Publishing House, 2004; Pp. 489-515.
Primus, B. “Case-Marking Typology”. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Jae Jung Song (ed.), 2012; Pp.303-321. DOI: 10.1093/oxford hb/9780199281251.013.0016.
Sabzalipur, J. & R. Izadifar (2014). Case Marking System in Tâti Dialect of Khalkhâl". Language Related Research, 2014; 5(4): 103-123.
Sanaati, M. & S. Zamani. Report of Compiling the Language Atlas of Semnan Province (Unpublished). Tehran: Richt Press, 2019.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • grammatical case
  • semantic case
  • adpositions
  • enclitics
  • Shahmirzadi language
بدخشان ابراهیم و همکاران. حالت­نمایی در کردی سورانی (سنندجی و بانه­ای)». زبان‌شناسی و گویش­های خراسان. 1393؛ 6(11): 1-28.
خانلری ناتل­ پرویز. دستور زبان فارسی. تهران: بنیاد فرهنگ ایران. 1357.
داوری شادی. ساخت ملکی در گویش سمنانی؛ پژوهشی براساس دیدگاه رده‌شناسی جزءگرا. در مجموعه مقالات همایش بین‌المللی گویش‌های مناطق کویری ایران. به­کوشش مصطفی جباری و عصمت اسماعیلی، 1391: 1015-1039.
داوری شادی، نغزگوی کهن مهرداد. حالت غیرفاعلی در تالشی: موردی از هم‌آیندی حالت، چندمعنایی و دستوری­شدگی. زبان فارسی و گویش‌های ایرانی، 1396؛ 2(1): 65-97.
دبیرمقدم محمد. زبان­شناسی نظری، پیدایش و تکوین دستور زایشی. تهران: سمت. 1389.
دبیرمقدم محمد. رده‌شناسی زبان‌های ایرانی. تهران: سمت. 1402.
راسخ‌مهند محمد. فرهنگ توصیفی نحو. تهران: علمی. 1393.
زهرایی سیدحسن. حالت و معنای حالت در زبان روسی. پژوهش ادبیات معاصر جهان. 1383؛(18): 51-64.
سبزعلی­پور جهاندوست، ایزدی­فر راحله. نظام حالت­نمایی در گویش تاتی خلخال. جستارهای زبانی. 1393؛ 5(4): 103-123.   
ستوده منوچهر. فرهنگ سمنانی، سرخه‌ای، لاسگردی، سنگسری، شهمیرزادی، تهران: دانشگاه تهران. 1342.
سراج فرشته، سراج اشرف. بررسی مقولۀ حالت در گویش سمنانی. مجموعه مقالات هشتمین همایش بین­المللی انجمن ترویج زبان و ادب فارسی، زنجان. 1392: 1-13.
شریعت محمدجواد. دستور زبان فارسی، تهران: اساطیر. 1375.
شفایی ایفا. تحلیل نحوی انطباق کنائی گسسته و مفعول­نمائی افتراقی در وفسی و تاتی شال. زبان‌شناخت. 1401؛ 13(1): 227-256.
شقاقی ویدا. مبانی صرف، تهران: سمت. 1386.
شیبانی­فرد فاطمه. بررسی حالت­های دستوری در گونۀ زبانی براهوییِ رودبار جنوب. زبان­ها و گویش‌های ایرانی (­نامۀ فرهنگستان). 1399؛ (11): 187-202.
صناعتی مرضیه، زمانی سلیمه.  گزارش تدوین اطلس زبانی استان سمنان، تهران: پژوهشگاه میراث فرهنگی و گردشگری. 1398 (گزارش چاپ نشده).
طباطبایی علاءالدین. فرهنگ توصیفی دستور زبان فارسی. تهران: فرهنگ معاصر. 1395.
علیزاده علی، تقوی ­گلیان محمد. بررسی صرفی نحوی گویش کرمانجی خراسان با تأکید بر نظام­های حالت. مطالعات فرهنگی اجتماعی خراسان. 1391؛ 7(1): 59-76.
فرهمند اقدم درنا. ساخت موضوعی و نحوۀ واگذاری حالت دستوری در جمله­های خبری ترکی. پایان‌نامۀ کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه بیرجند. دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی. 1391.
کریستن‌سن آرتور. گویش سمنان، ترجمة احسان ابراهیمیان و حمیدرضا حسن‌زاده توکلی، انتشارات دانشگاه سمنان. 1389.
کلباسی ایران. فرهنگ توصیفی گونه‌های زبانی ایران. تهران: پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی. 1388.
لکوک، پی‌یر. گویش­های حاشیه دریای خزر و گویش­های شمال غرب ایران. در راهنمای زبان‌های ایرانی: زبان‌های ایرانی نو، ویراستار: رودیگر اشمیت، مترجمـان: آرمان بختیاری و دیگران، جلد دوم، تهران: ققنوس. 1383: 515-489.
ماهوتیان، شهرزاد. دستور زبان فارسی از دیدگاه رده‌شناسی. ترجمة مهدی سمائی. تهران: مرکز. 1378.
محمودی‌بختیاری بهروز ()، نظام حالت در زبان­های ایرانی (غربی)، رسالة دکتری. تهران: دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی. 1383.
مختاری تارا، سمائی سیدمهدی ، مدرسی بهرام. پژوهش رده­شناسانۀ مقولۀ حالت در چهار گونۀ زبانی ترکی (آذری، خلجی، آناتولیایی و ازبکی)». فصلنامۀ زبان­شناسی اجتماعی. 1400؛ 5(17): 45-56.
میردهقان مهین­ناز، یوسفی سعیدرضا. «حالت و حالت­نمایی در وفسی». زبان­شناخت. 1391؛ 3(5): 85-105.
نقشبندی زانیار. تلفیق مشخصۀ حالت در گویش هورامی. مجموعه مقالات هشتمین همایش زبان‌شناسی ایران. 1391: 848- 857.
نغزگوی­کهن، مهرداد. نقش پس‌اضافه­ها در اعطای حالت (مطالعه­ای موردی در گویش تالشی). زبان‌ها و گویش‌های ایرانی (­نامۀ فرهنگستان). 1392؛ (3): 111-132.

Alizadeh, A. & M. Taqavi Gelian “A Syntactic - Inflectional Study of Kormanji Dialect of Khorasan with the Emphasison Systems of Mood”. Journal of Socio-Cultural Studies of Khorasan, 2012, 7(1): 59-76. Doi.10.22034/fakh.2013.156249.

Azami, Ch. A. & G. Windfuhr. A dictiorary of Sangesari with a grammatical outline. Tehran: Sherkat-e Sahami-ye Katabhaye Jibi, 1972.

Badakhshan, E. and Y. Karimi and R. Ranjbar. “Case and Agreement in Sorani Dialects of Sanandaj and and Bane: a Minimalist Approach”. Journal of Linguistics & Khorasan Dialects, 2014, 6 (11): Pp: 1–28. DOI:10.22067/lj.v6i11.37355.

Baerman, M. “Case Syncritism”. In the Oxford Handbook of Case, ed. Andrej Malchukov and Andrew Spencer, New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.
Blake, B.J. Case .2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2004.
Bussmann, H. Rutledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics, 2ndedition, translated and edited by Trauth, G, and Kazzazi, K. New York: Routledge, 2006.
Butt, M. Theories of Case. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Chomsky, N. Minimalist Inquiries: The Framework. In H. Lasnik, R. A. Martin, D. Michaels, & J. Uriagereka, Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik, Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 2000, 89-155.
Croft, W. Typology and Universals. 2ndedition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Crystal, D. A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 6th edition. Blackwell, 2008.

Dabir Moghaddam, M. Theoretical Linguistics: Emergence and Development of Generative Grammar. (2nd Ed.). Samt Organization Press, 2010.

Dabir Moghaddam, M. Typology of Iranian Languages. (2nd Ed.). Samt Organization Press, 2014.

Davari, Sh. “Possesion Construction in the Semnani Dialect: A Study Based on the Componential Typology Approach”. In the Proceedings of the International Conference on the Dialects of Iran's Desert Regions, Edited by Mostafa Jabbari and Esmat Esmaeili. 2012, 1015-1039.

Davari, Sh. and M. Naghzkuye Kohan. “Oblique case in Talishi: Evidence from case syncretism, polysemi and grammaticalization”. Persian Language and Iranian Dialects. 2017, 2 (1): Pp: 65-97. DOI: 10.22124/plid.2017.2476.

Diesing, M. Indefinites. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1992.
Dryer, M. S. “The Greenbergian Word Order Correlations”, Language, 1992, 68, 81-138.
Dryer, M. S. “Order of Adposition and Noun Phrase”. The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by Martin Haspelmath, Matthew S. Dryer, David Gil, and Bernard Comrie. Oxford University Press. 2005, 346-349.
Dryer, M. S. “Word Order”. Language Typology and Syntactic Description. Edited by Thimothy Shopen.Vol 1. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
Farahmand Aghdam, D. Thematic Structure and the Methods of Assigning Grammatical Case in Turkish Declarative Sentences. M.A. Thesis. Birjand University. Faculty of Literature and Humanities, 2012.
Ghomeshi, J. Non-Projecting Nouns and the Ezafe: Construction in Persian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 1997, 15(5):729–788.
Greenberg, J. H. “Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements”. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1963, 73–113.
Haig, G. Alignment Change in Iranian Languages: A Construction Grammar Approach. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008.
Hewson, J. & V. Bubenik. From Case to Adposition: The development of Configurational Syntax in Indo-European Languages. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2006.
Iggesen, O.A. “Number of cases”. The World Atlas of Language Structures. Edited by: M. Haspelmath and M.S. Drayer and d. Gil and B. Comrie, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, 202-205.
Kalbasi, I. A Descriptive Dictionary of Iranian Languages. Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies Press, 2009.
Kristensen, A. Semnan Dialect. Translated by: Ebrahimian, E. and H. Hasanzadeh Tavakkoli, Semnan University Press, 2010.
Kroeger, Paul R. Analyzing Grammar an Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Kurzon, D. “Adpositions”. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics. Edited by Keith Brown. Elsevier Ltd., 2006, 63-66.
Lecoq, P. “Caspian dialects and the dialects of northwestern Iran. In Rüdiger Schmitt (ed.). Compendium of Iranian Languages. Translated by Arman Bakhtiyari et al. Vol. 2. Tehran: Qoqnoos Publishing House. 2004, 489-515.
Mahmoodi Bakhtiari, B. Case System in (Western) Iranian Languages. PhD Thesis. Tehran: Allameh University, 2004.
Mahootiyan, Sh. Persian Grammar from a typological perspective. Translated by Mehdi Samaai. Markaz Publishing, 1999.
Malchukov, Andrej and Andrew Spencer. “Typology of Case Systems Parameters of Variation”. The Oxford Handbook of Case. Edited by Andrej Malchukov and Andrew Spencer. 2009, 651-667.
Marantz, A. Case and Licensing. In G. F. Westphal, B. Ao, & H.-R. Chao (Ed.), ESCOL '91: Proceedings of the Eighth Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, Baltımore: Ohio State University, University of Maryland, 1991, 234-253.
Mirdehghan, M. & S. Yusefi. “Case and Case Marking in Vafsi”. Language Studies, 2012, 3(5): 85-105.
Mokhtari,  T. & Seyed M. Samaei & B. Modarresi. “A Typological Study of Case in Four Varieties of Turkish Language (Azeri, Khalaji, Anatolian and Uzbek)”. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 2021, 5(1): 45-56. Doi.10.30473/il.2022.60170.1472.
Naghshbandi, Z. “Integration of the feature of Case in the Hoorami Dialect”. In the proceedings of the Eighth Conference on Linguistics in Iran, 2021, 281, 847-857.
Naghzkuye Kohan, M. “The Role of Postpositions in Case Marking (A Case Study in the Talysh Dialect)”. Iranian Languages and Dialects (Nameh Farhangestan). 2013, 3: 111-132.
Natel Khanlari, P. Persian Grammar. Tehran: Iran Culture Foundation Press, 1978.
Nichols, J. “On direct and oblique cases”. Berkeley Linguistics Society 9, 1983, 170–92.
Primus, B. “Case-Marking Typology”. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Edited by Jae Jung Song. 2012, 303-321. DOI: 10.1093/oxford hb/9780199281251. 013.0016.
Rasekh-Mahand, M. Syntactic descriptive dictionary. Scientific Publication, 2014.

Sabzalipur, J. & R. Izadifar. “Case Marking System in Tâti Dialect of Khalkhâl”. Language Related Research, 2014, 5 (4) :103-123.

Sanaati, M. & S. Zamani. Report of Compiling The Language Atlas of Semnan Province (Unpublished). Tehran: Richt Press, 2019. 
Seraj, F. & A. Seraj. “The Study of Case in the Semnan Dialect”. The 8th International Conference of the Iranian Society of Persian Language and Literature. Zanjan. 2013, 1-13.
Shafaei, I. “A Syntactic Analysis of Split-Ergative Alignment and Differential Object Marking in Vafsi and Chali”. Language Studies, 2022, 13 (1): 227-256.
Shaghaghi, V. Basics of morphology. Tehran: Samt Organization Press, 2007.
Shariat, M.J. Persian Grammar. Tehran: Asaatir Press, 1996.
Sheibani Fard, F. “A study of grammatical cases in the Brahui dialect of South Rudbar”. Iranian Languages and Dialects (Nameh Farhangestan). 2020, 11, 187-202.

Sotoudeh, M. Semnani, Sorekhai, Lasgardi, Sangsari, Shahmirzadi Dictionaries. Tehran University Press, 1963.

Stranzy, Ph. Encyclopedia of Linguistics. New York: Fitzory Dearorn, 2005.
Tabatabaei, A. A Desciptive Dictionary of Persian Grammar. Tehran: Farhang Moaser Press, 2016. www.amar.org.ir/1395
Zahrayi, S.H. “Case and Semantic Case in Russian Language”. Journal of Research in Contemporary World Literature, 2004, 9(18): 51-64.