Volume 13, Issue 6 (2023)
LRR 2023, 13(6): 355-394 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Sarkissian Seghin C, Mirdehghan Farashah M. Word Order in Eastern Armenian Language Based on Dryer's Branching Direction Theory. LRR 2023; 13 (6) :355-394
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-49038-en.html
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-49038-en.html
1- Ph.D. Candidate in General Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2- Associate Professor of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran , M_Mirdehghan@sbu.ac.ir
2- Associate Professor of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran , M_Mirdehghan@sbu.ac.ir
Abstract: (1394 Views)
In the present research word order has been used to determine the type of Eastern Armenian Language in comparison to the groups of “Eurasian” and “world” languages based on Dryer's (1992) “Branching Direction Theory”. Dryer (1992), has introduced 23 correlation pairs as verb-patterned and object-patterned, to determine the word order in languages. He has argued against Greenberg's (1963) “Head-Dependent Theory” and by presenting “Branching Direction Theory” has concluded that the word order correlations reflect a tendency for languages to be consistently right-branching or consistently left-branching. The main question here is to investigate the belonging of Eastern Armenian language to the OV or VO language types, in comparison to “Eurasian” as well as “world languages”. In achieving the research goals, 19 valid correlation pairs have been analyzed within the collected data. The results show that Eastern Armenian language in comparison to group of “Eurasian” languages has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 15 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to VO languages; In case of its comparison to the group of “world languages” it has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 14 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to both OV and VO languages. Furthermore, it illustrates that despite Dryer's (1992) claim, the Eastern Armenian language does not have tendency to be classified consistently in a left-branching or right-branching type. Based on these, the median type could be considered as an independent type for Eastern Armenian language.
1. Introduction
One of the most important topics in language typology is the study of word order in languages. Dreyer is among the most well known linguists in this field. He (1992) has introduced 23 correlation pairs as verb-patterned and object-patterned, to determine the word order in languages and by presenting “Branching Direction Theory” he has concluded that the word order correlations reflect a tendency for languages to be consistently right-branching or consistently left-branching. The main question here is to investigate the belonging of Eastern Armenian Language to the OV or VO language types, in comparison to “Eurasian” as well as “world languages”.
2. Literature Review
The question of whether the basic word order in Eastern Armenian is OV or VO is a matter of controversy. Many descriptive and typological studies consider it to be a SOV language (Der-Houssikian, 1978; Dryer, 1998; Dum-Tragut, 2002; Howkins, 1979; Hawkins, 1983; Kozentseva, 1995; Minassian, 1980). The studies based on the generative grammar have placed it in group of SOV languages, considering that it is head final, therefore SVO order is considered as the result of movement (Hodgson, 2013; Giorgi & Haroutyunian, 2016; Kahnemuyipour & Megerdoomian, 2011; Tamrazian, 1991; Tamrazian, 1994). Some studies have placed it the median type between OV and VO (Dum-Tragut, 2009; Dryer, 2013 in WALS). Other grammarian believe that SVO is its basic order (Abrahamyan, 1975; Arakelyan, 1958; Badikyan, 1976; Papoyan & Badikyan, 2003). Faghiri and Samvelian (2019) show that the distribution of SVO order is too high to qualify as a marked option.
3. Methodology
As a descriptive-analytical study, the main data collection of the present research has been provided by the first author as a native Eastern Armenian speaker in the form of sentences, clauses and phrases in Eastern Armenian. In addition the gathered data has been asked from 15 other Iranian-Armenian speakers and have been compared to the examples of Avetisyan and Zakaryan (2012).
4. Results
The results show that 4 out of 23 correlation pairs do not apply in Eastern Armenian which are as follows: 1. adpositional phrases and manner adverbs, 2. order of verb and negative particle, 3. order of content verb and negative auxiliary verb and 4. order of plural word and noun.
The 19 correlation pairs which are used in this study are 1. adposition and NP, 2. N and Relative clause, 3. noun and genitive, 4. adjective and standard of comparison, 5. verb and adpositional phrase, 6. verb and manner adverb, 7. copula and predicate, 8. "want" and subordinate verb, 9. noun and adjective, 10. noun and demonstrative, 11. adjective and intensifier, 12. tense/aspect auxiliary and verb, 13. question particle and sentence, 14. adverbial subordinator and S, 15. noun and article, 16. verb and subject, 17. numeral and noun, 18. tense/aspect affix and verb stem, 19. possessive affix and noun.
There are two differences between results of present research in compared to Wals data. The first difference is about adposition. Examples 1 to 4 respectively show that Eastern Armenian has pretposition, postposition and adpositions which used as both preposition and postposition.
Example 1. preposition
"Ara went home."
Example 2. postposition
"Ara read instead of Siran."
Example 3. preposition
"There was no one but Ara."
Example 4. postposition
"There was no one but Ara."
The second difference is about question particle which could be placed at the beginning, middle or end of the sentence. Alternatively, the sentence can be used without question particle. Examples 5 to 8 show the position of question particle while example 9 represents a sentence without question particle.
Example 5.
"Do you like me?"
Example 6.
"Do you like me?"
Example 7.
"Do you like me?"
Example 8.
"Do you like me?"
Example 9.
"Do you like me?"
The results show that Eastern Armenian language in comparison to group of “Eurasian” languages has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 15 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to VO languages; In case of its comparison to the group of “world languages” it has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 14 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to both OV and VO languages. Table 1 shows Eastern Armenian language in comparison to Eurasian languages and table 2 shows Eastern Armenian language in comparison to world languages.
Table 1.
Eastern Armenian language in comparison to Eurasian languages
Table 2:
Eastern Armenian language in comparison to world languages
5. Conclusion
The research findings show that in comparison to the group of “Eurasian” languages Eastern Armenian has a tendency towards VO languages. In case of its comparison to the group of “world languages”, it has a tendency to both OV and VO languages. Based on these, the median type could be considered as an independent type for Eastern Armenian language.
1. Introduction
One of the most important topics in language typology is the study of word order in languages. Dreyer is among the most well known linguists in this field. He (1992) has introduced 23 correlation pairs as verb-patterned and object-patterned, to determine the word order in languages and by presenting “Branching Direction Theory” he has concluded that the word order correlations reflect a tendency for languages to be consistently right-branching or consistently left-branching. The main question here is to investigate the belonging of Eastern Armenian Language to the OV or VO language types, in comparison to “Eurasian” as well as “world languages”.
2. Literature Review
The question of whether the basic word order in Eastern Armenian is OV or VO is a matter of controversy. Many descriptive and typological studies consider it to be a SOV language (Der-Houssikian, 1978; Dryer, 1998; Dum-Tragut, 2002; Howkins, 1979; Hawkins, 1983; Kozentseva, 1995; Minassian, 1980). The studies based on the generative grammar have placed it in group of SOV languages, considering that it is head final, therefore SVO order is considered as the result of movement (Hodgson, 2013; Giorgi & Haroutyunian, 2016; Kahnemuyipour & Megerdoomian, 2011; Tamrazian, 1991; Tamrazian, 1994). Some studies have placed it the median type between OV and VO (Dum-Tragut, 2009; Dryer, 2013 in WALS). Other grammarian believe that SVO is its basic order (Abrahamyan, 1975; Arakelyan, 1958; Badikyan, 1976; Papoyan & Badikyan, 2003). Faghiri and Samvelian (2019) show that the distribution of SVO order is too high to qualify as a marked option.
3. Methodology
As a descriptive-analytical study, the main data collection of the present research has been provided by the first author as a native Eastern Armenian speaker in the form of sentences, clauses and phrases in Eastern Armenian. In addition the gathered data has been asked from 15 other Iranian-Armenian speakers and have been compared to the examples of Avetisyan and Zakaryan (2012).
4. Results
The results show that 4 out of 23 correlation pairs do not apply in Eastern Armenian which are as follows: 1. adpositional phrases and manner adverbs, 2. order of verb and negative particle, 3. order of content verb and negative auxiliary verb and 4. order of plural word and noun.
The 19 correlation pairs which are used in this study are 1. adposition and NP, 2. N and Relative clause, 3. noun and genitive, 4. adjective and standard of comparison, 5. verb and adpositional phrase, 6. verb and manner adverb, 7. copula and predicate, 8. "want" and subordinate verb, 9. noun and adjective, 10. noun and demonstrative, 11. adjective and intensifier, 12. tense/aspect auxiliary and verb, 13. question particle and sentence, 14. adverbial subordinator and S, 15. noun and article, 16. verb and subject, 17. numeral and noun, 18. tense/aspect affix and verb stem, 19. possessive affix and noun.
There are two differences between results of present research in compared to Wals data. The first difference is about adposition. Examples 1 to 4 respectively show that Eastern Armenian has pretposition, postposition and adpositions which used as both preposition and postposition.
Example 1. preposition
| ARA-n | gn-AtsH | depi | tun |
| Ara-DEF | go-3SG.PAST | to | home |
Example 2. postposition
| ARA-n | siRAn-i | pHoxARen | kARtH-AtsH |
| Ara-DEF | Siran-ezafe | instead of | read-3SG.PAST |
Example 3. preposition
| bAtsHi | ARAj-itsH | mARtH | tSH-kA-R |
| but | Ara-ABL | person | NEG-be-3SG.PAST |
Example 4. postposition
| ARAj-itsH | batsHi | mARtH | tSH-kA-R |
| Ara-ABL | But | Person | NEG-be-3SG.PAST |
The second difference is about question particle which could be placed at the beginning, middle or end of the sentence. Alternatively, the sentence can be used without question particle. Examples 5 to 8 show the position of question particle while example 9 represents a sentence without question particle.
Example 5.
| ARtHjokH | du | indz | siR-um | es |
| Q-marker | You | Me | like-PROG | 2SG.PRES.AUX |
Example 6.
| du | ARtHjokH | indz | siR-um | es |
| you | Q-marker | me | like-PROG | 2SG.PRES.AUX |
Example 7.
| du | indz | ARtHjokH | siR-um | es |
| you | me | Q-marker | like-PROG | 2SG.PRES.AUX |
Example 8.
| du | indz | siR-um | es | ARtHjokH |
| you | me | like-PROG | 2SG.PRES.AUX | Q-marker |
Example 9.
| du | indz | siR-um | es |
| you | me | like-PROG | 2SG.PRES.AUX |
The results show that Eastern Armenian language in comparison to group of “Eurasian” languages has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 15 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to VO languages; In case of its comparison to the group of “world languages” it has 14 characteristics of strong OV languages and 14 characteristics of strong VO languages, hence, it has a tendency to both OV and VO languages. Table 1 shows Eastern Armenian language in comparison to Eurasian languages and table 2 shows Eastern Armenian language in comparison to world languages.
Table 1.
Eastern Armenian language in comparison to Eurasian languages
| Element | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | Total | |
| Type | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Strong verb final |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 14 | ||||||
| Weak verb final |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 9 | |||||||||||
| Weak Verb medial |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 8 | ||||||||||||
| Strong Verb medial |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 15 | |||||
Table 2:
Eastern Armenian language in comparison to world languages
| Element | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | Total | |
| Type | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Strong verb final |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 14 | ||||||
| Weak verb final |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 9 | |||||||||||
| Weak verb medial | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 9 | |||||||||||
| Strong Verb medial |
X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | 14 | ||||||
5. Conclusion
The research findings show that in comparison to the group of “Eurasian” languages Eastern Armenian has a tendency towards VO languages. In case of its comparison to the group of “world languages”, it has a tendency to both OV and VO languages. Based on these, the median type could be considered as an independent type for Eastern Armenian language.
Keywords: correlation pairs, Eastern Armenian, word order, linguistics typology, Branching Direction Theory
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |