Volume 8, Issue 2 (2017)
LRR 2017, 8(2): 149-170 |
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:
Sharif B, amouzadeh M. Persian Compound Verb Formation from a Cognitive Grammar Viewpoint. LRR 2017; 8 (2) :149-170
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-10562-en.html
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-10562-en.html
1- PhD student in linguistics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2- Professor of linguistics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2- Professor of linguistics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract: (11120 Views)
The process of compound predicates (CPr) formation in Persian has got little attention on behalf of linguists. This paper aims to situate the components of Persian light verb constructions in contexts that can be justifiably invoked as a motivation for CPr formation. The authors believe that CPrs can be considered as direct or indirect products of incorporation process.
We hold here a broad concept of incorporation, namely X incorporation (XI), in which X indicates categories including nominals, adjectives and prepositional phrases. This process, explicated by means of some concepts from Cognitive Grammar, involves CPrs originating from complete clauses, and then passing through a compositional path where a nonverbal and a verbal element are selected out of a clause and end up in a complex predicate. In such a hypothetical path, a verb argument is occasionally omitted and the verb complement or adjunct, having a higher cognitive salience, is incorporated to it.
The investigation will continue with focusing on the LVCs constructed with LV kardan ‘do, make’, as the most frequently used light verb in Persian. The paper will also explore how different paths could be associated with different ‘heavy’ meanings of kardan.
Moreover, each CPr may further provide speakers with constructional schemasupon which other LVCs formed with a given LV can be sanctioned.
Considering different kinds of LVCs explained in this paper, we can say that the semantic contribution of LVs falls into one of the two following possibilities depending on how the LVC in question is formed:
i. Compositional path is directly conceivable. When this is the case, the semantics of LV is equivalent to, or derived from, a main or extended sense of its non-light counterpart, as in emtehân dâdan ‘to take an exam’ (lit. to exam-give), xâb raftan ‘to fall asleep’ (lit. to sleepN-go), and lâne kardan ‘to nest’ (lit. to nestN-do).
ii. Compositional path is indirectly accessible through a constructional schema. In this case, the LV‘s semantic contribution can be thought of as dissolved in the constructional meaning of the relevant schema, as in imeyl zadan ‘to email’ (lit. to emailN-hit) whose LV has nothing to do with ‘hit‘, but imports a sense of ‘communication’ immanent in the constructional schema X + zadan which is in turn inherited from telegrâf zadan ‘to telegraph’ (lit. to telegraphN-hit).
iii. The compound verb is a denominal verb in which the light verb serves to verbalize a non-verbal element. In this case the semantic contribution of the light verb is to add processual meaning to the predicate.
We hold here a broad concept of incorporation, namely X incorporation (XI), in which X indicates categories including nominals, adjectives and prepositional phrases. This process, explicated by means of some concepts from Cognitive Grammar, involves CPrs originating from complete clauses, and then passing through a compositional path where a nonverbal and a verbal element are selected out of a clause and end up in a complex predicate. In such a hypothetical path, a verb argument is occasionally omitted and the verb complement or adjunct, having a higher cognitive salience, is incorporated to it.
The investigation will continue with focusing on the LVCs constructed with LV kardan ‘do, make’, as the most frequently used light verb in Persian. The paper will also explore how different paths could be associated with different ‘heavy’ meanings of kardan.
Moreover, each CPr may further provide speakers with constructional schemasupon which other LVCs formed with a given LV can be sanctioned.
Considering different kinds of LVCs explained in this paper, we can say that the semantic contribution of LVs falls into one of the two following possibilities depending on how the LVC in question is formed:
i. Compositional path is directly conceivable. When this is the case, the semantics of LV is equivalent to, or derived from, a main or extended sense of its non-light counterpart, as in emtehân dâdan ‘to take an exam’ (lit. to exam-give), xâb raftan ‘to fall asleep’ (lit. to sleepN-go), and lâne kardan ‘to nest’ (lit. to nestN-do).
ii. Compositional path is indirectly accessible through a constructional schema. In this case, the LV‘s semantic contribution can be thought of as dissolved in the constructional meaning of the relevant schema, as in imeyl zadan ‘to email’ (lit. to emailN-hit) whose LV has nothing to do with ‘hit‘, but imports a sense of ‘communication’ immanent in the constructional schema X + zadan which is in turn inherited from telegrâf zadan ‘to telegraph’ (lit. to telegraphN-hit).
iii. The compound verb is a denominal verb in which the light verb serves to verbalize a non-verbal element. In this case the semantic contribution of the light verb is to add processual meaning to the predicate.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |