Inflectional suffixes vary in past and present tenses among inhabitants of historical Khānik willage of Gonabad. This study has been based on the analysis of the interviews done with the dialect speakers. Data from the Iliterate speakers in the village of Khānik were collected and then written down and analyzed. The purpose is to introduce identifiers, which is older than the oldest existing texts of the Persian language. The ultimate outcome goes, "in Khānik dialect, inflectional suffixes fall into past and present categories. The third person for all the past tenses and for all verbs in the Khānikin dialect have inflectional suffix. Interestingly, third singular person in simple past of this dialect has inflectional suffix while some researchers believe, inflectional suffix of third singular person for simple past form of all Persian verbs is a zero one. Besides common use of third singular person verbs with inflectional suffix in simple past tense, present perfect structures are also commonly used. The other noteworthy point in the Khānikin dialect is the fluctuating place of the inflectional suffix. This inflectional suffix's place varies in present perfect, past perfect, passive and negative voice of some verbs
 
Extended Abstract

Introduction

In the dialect spoken in the village of Khānik (Gonabad, Iran), verbal person marking (suffixes) differs across past, present and imperative constructions. The existence of multiple types of person markers represents one of the main distinctions between this dialect and Standard Persian. Furthermore, in past tense constructions, the position of the person marker may vary. Notably, the third person singular in the past tense takes the marker [eʃ]. Research Questions are as follows:

Do the person markers in the past and present tense verbs of the Khānik dialect differ from each other and from those in Standard Persian?
Do all third-person singular past tense verbs in the Khānik dialect take a person marker, and if so, how?
How and under what conditions does the displacement of the person marker (ergativity) occur in the Khānik dialect?

Hypotheses are:

In the Khānik dialect, person markers in the past and present tenses differ both from each other and from those in Standard Persian.
All third-person singular past tense verbs take a person marker.
In this dialect, the person marker in past tense verbs sometimes occurs not at the end of the verb, but at the end of another constituent of the clause (ergative alignment).

Iran Kalbasi, in her article “The Role and Position of Verbal Agreement Markers and Enclitic Pronouns in Iranian Dialects”, classifies the Khānik dialect as belonging to the group of ergative dialects (Kalbasi, 2002, pp. 77–102). Zahra Ekhtiari has written several books and articles on the Khānik dialect (see Ekhtiari, 2014a; 2014b; 2009, pp. 1–21; 2012, pp. 29–50; 2017).

Theoretical Framework

Data collection was carried out following the principles of traditional dialectology. Questionnaires were completed based on Zomorrodian’s Guide to the Collection and Description of Dialects.

Methodology

Interviews with native speakers were conducted, and their speech was recorded unobtrusively. The recorded material was transcribed, and verbs derived from simple, prefixed, transitive, intransitive, active, passive and negative infinitives were conjugated across different tenses. Sentences containing verbs of various tenses were analyzed, and the person markers were then examined in detail. The author is herself a native speaker of Khānik and consulted her late parents, who were also fluent speakers of the dialect.

Results & Discussion

In the Khānik dialect, person markers are divided into two categories: past and present. The past tense endings are as follows:
ʊm (first person singular)  mæ (first person plural)
et (second person singular)  tæ (second person plural)
eʃ (third person singular)  ʃæ (third person plural)
The present tense endings are as follows:
ʊm (first person singular)  em (first person plural)
i (second person singular)  æ (second person plural)
æt (third person singular)  æn (third person plural)
Among the past and present tense verbs, only the first-person singular ending [ʊm] is shared. In this dialect, all the grammatical tenses of Standard Persian are in use, except for the progressive aspect. Moreover, there are certain tenses used by the people of Khānik that do not exist in Standard Persian (see Ekhtiari, 2015, pp. 29–47).
The Third-Person Singular Past Marker
In Standard Persian, “all verbal constructions take a person marker except for the third-person singular of the simple past tense and the second-person singular imperative” (Farshidvard, 2001, pp. 131). One of the major distinctions between the Khānik dialect and Standard Persian lies in the fact that in Khānik, all third-person singular past tense verbs take the marker [ʃ], e.g.,
[be-ræfte=ʃ] (he/she went).
 
Positional Variability of Person Markers
The Khānik dialect exhibits partial ergativity. In past tense constructions, the person marker (as a clitic) often appears at the end of constituents other than the main verb:
Example                                Gloss
ɑ:w=ʊm xɑ:                          “I drank water”
ɑ:w=mæ xɑ:                         “We drank water”
ɑ:w=et xɑ:                            “You (sg.) drank water”
ɑ:w=tæ xɑ:                           “You (pl.) drank water”
ɑ:w=eʃ xɑ:                            “He/She drank water”
ɑ:w=ʃæ xɑ:                           “They drank water”
The displacement of the person marker depends on several factors: the polarity (affirmative or negative) of the verb, its transitivity (active/passive), and whether the verb is simple or prefixed. The position also varies when the clause contains additional elements besides the verb.
Verbs derived from the infinitive [mæ:jstæ:] were excluded from this analysis, as they were discussed in detail elsewhere (Ekhtiari, 2017).
Negation
Negation in Khānik is formed with [næ] or [mæ], e.g.,
[vær-mæ: gærd] “don’t return”,
[vær-mæ: gærdæ] “don’t return (pl.)”.
Imperative
Imperative verbs are formed, as in Standard Persian, for the second person singular and plural.
In first-person imperatives, the marker often appears through the deletion of final letters of the stem, while in the plural form, the vowel [æ] is typically added to the end of the present stem:
Formation rule for second-person plural imperative: (be + present stem + [æ])
Examples:
benʃi “sit (sg.)”
benʃinæ “sit (pl.)”

Conclusions & Suggestions

This study was conducted primarily through interviews with elderly speakers of the Khānik village dialect. After eliciting and conjugating a range of verbs, the person markers were systematically analyzed. The findings reveal several noteworthy and previously undocumented features, including: (1) the existence of two distinct sets of person markers for the past and present tenses, and (2) the occurrence of person markers in past tense verbs occasionally appearing at the end of a non-verbal constituent (i.e., in the Wackernagel position). Also, in present tense verbs, the position of the person marker corresponds to that of Standard Persian. In second-person singular imperatives, the marker appears through deletion of final letters of the stem, while in the plural it is formed by adding [æ] to the end of the present stem. A major distinction from Standard Persian, though attested in Old Persian and certain modern dialects, is that all third-person singular past tense verbs in Khānik take the marker [ʃ]. The perfect tense, like other past tenses, is fully productive in this dialect. perfect, passive and negative voice of some verbs.
Select Bibliography
Baker, Mark C. The Syntax of Agreement and Concord. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Comrie, Bernard. “Ergativity”, In Lehmann, Winfred P. (ed.), Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1978, Pp. 329-394.
Etehadi, H. “The Importance of Sistani Dialect Words and Compounds in Persian Literary Texts”, Persian Language and Iranian Dialects, 2023, 2 (16): 125-141. [In Persian]       10.22124/plid.2024.26400.1659
Ekhteyari, Z. “Analysis of some words from Beihaqi’s History”, Zaban va adabeyat e Farsi daneshkade adabeyat e Tabriz, 2009, 209 (52): 1-21. [In Persian]
Ekhteyari, Z. “Description of Infinitive “æ:h” in Khāniki Dialect and a Comparison with other Dialects”. Zabanshenasi va Guyeshhay Khorasan, 2012, 1 (6): 29-50 [In Persian]. 10.22067/lj.v4i6.20365
Ekhteyari, Z. “Future Perfect and a few rare tenses in the Khānikian dialect”. Zabanshenasi va Guyeshhay Khorasan, 2016, (12): 29-47. [In Persian]  10.22067/lj.v7i12.50804
Ekhteyari, Z. “Rare infinitive constructions of "mæ:jstæ:" in the Khāniki dialect”.  Language Related Research, 2019 48: 267- 295. [In Persian]
 Etehadi, H. “The Importance of Sistani Dialect Words and Compounds in Persian Literary Texts”, Persian Language and Iranian Dialects, 2023, 2 (16): 125-141. [In Persian]
Yahaqhi. M.J. A Dictionary of Tun (Ferdows) Dialect. Tehran: Farhangestan e zaban va adab e farsi, 2017. [In Persian]