Volume 12, Issue 6 (2021)
LRR 2021, 12(6): 187-230 |
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:
Veisi Hasar R, Dehghan M. Ezafe Construction in Kurdish: A Cognitive Approach. LRR 2021; 12 (6) :187-230
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-39865-en.html
URL: http://lrr.modares.ac.ir/article-14-39865-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Department of English and Linguistics, Faculty of Language and Literature, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Kurdistan, Iran , r.veisihesar@uok.ac.ir
2- Assistant Professor, Department of English and Linguistics, Faculty of language and Literature, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Kurdistan, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Department of English and Linguistics, Faculty of language and Literature, University of Kurdistan, Sanandaj, Kurdistan, Iran
Abstract: (4060 Views)
The present study aims to investigate the Ezafe construction in Kurdish (Sorani dialect) based on cognitive grammar. The nature of the methodology of this qualitative research is descriptive-analytic, and the data have been collected via the interview with Kurdish speakers. The authenticity and originality of the collected data have been approved by Kurdish speakers of this linguistic variety. Ezafe marker is considered as the invoker of an intrinsic relationship between two entities having a kind of conceptual proximity. In a way, one entity is considered as a reference-point based on which the location of the other entity is cognitively determined. In this construction, the landmark plays the role of a reference-point to provide a mental path to the trajector as the target. The findings showed that Ezafe in this dialect is the result of the grammaticalization of a relative pronoun HYA by which the intrinsic-conceptual relation between elements is profiled in a complex sentence. It should be noted that Ezafe marker has developed from the relative pronoun HYA in Old Persian. Accordingly, this relative pronoun, as an Ezafe marker, has been gradually transformed into an element profiling an asymmetric relationship between congruent entities within a single phrase (N Ez N; N Ez adj; N Ez preposition; N Ez nominalized verb) or in a clause (predicative Ezafe and topicalizing Ezafe). Also, the results showed that Ezafe marker indicates this asymmetric relation at different linguistic levels.
1. Introduction
The Cognitive Linguistics approach is considered as a new approach in linguistics (Langacker 1987; Lakoff and Johnson 1980) which tries to explain linguistic phenomena according to cognitive processes without drawing a strict boundary and limitation between linguistic and non-linguistics capabilities. Rejecting the modularity of grammar, it ties to explain syntactic constructions according to the same cognitive processes that are used in non-linguistic phenomena. In harmony with this approach, we try to explain Ezafe construction in Kurdish from a cognitive perspective. In other words, we try to explain the fundamental cognitive processes underlying this frequent and important construction.
The traditional grammarians (Qharib, et al. 1971: 39-45; Moiin 1984; Anvari and Ahmadi-Givi,2011: 134- 138) have described Ezafe as a pure relationship between two entities that may convey a wide variety of meanings. They (ibid) have proposed many functions and senses for Ezafe in Iranian languages. Its numerous functions have been described as Eazfe for possession (ezafeye melki: ketābe ʔali: Ali’s book), Ezafe for expressing the material of a nominal head (ezafeye bayāni: halqeye talā: ring of gold), Ezafe for specifying a noun (ezafeye taxsisi: mize motāleʔe: table for studying), Ezafe for elaborating on the noun (ezafeye tozihi: ŝahre tehrān: city of Tehran) and kinship Ezafe (ezafeye bonovvat: mādar-e ʔisā: mother of Jesus). However, its real semantic and syntactic diversity goes beyond this number. Ezafe linker covers not only a variety of semantic relationships, but also it is used in different grammatical constructions including nominal phrase (nominal collocation: noun Ez noun and nominal periphrasis: noun Ez nominalized verb), prepositional phrase (preposition Ez noun), predicative Ezafe (determiner noun EZ noun copular verb), topicalized structure (topic Ez proposition) and Ezafe for modification by an adjective (noun Ez adjective). This semantic and syntactic diversity leads the formal linguists to consider it as a vacuous element emerging just because of formal computations and structural restrictions (Samiian 1994; Ghomeshi 1997; Samvelian 2005; Karimi 2007; Kahnemuyipour 2014).
The Ezafe construction has been traced back to the (h)ya as a relative pronoun in Old Persian (Moiin 1984: 8-9; 18; Abolqhasemi 2006: 38). The cognitive function of this relative pronoun was for identifying the trajector with another participant in the relative clause. The following example (inscription of Darius at the Naqsh-i-Rostam (DNa)) illustrates the function of hay in Old Persian:
baga vazraka Auramazdā hya imām būmim adā,
the god great Ahuramazda who this earth created
hya avam asmānam adā,
who this sky created
hya martiyam adā, hya šiyātim adā martiyahyā, hya Dārayavaum
who mankind created, who happiness created for mankind, who Darius
xšāyaθiyam akunauš.
king made.
Great god is Ahuramazda, who created the earth, who created the sky, who created the man, who created happiness for man, who made Darius king.
It may be argued that the main and primary function of hya is to make a linguistic coordination between two entities that are conceptually parallel and co-equal. However, this relative pronoun undergoes a drastic change in modern Kurdish. It can illustrate any possible relationship between two participants within a single noun phrase. In other words, the Ezafe (as the successor of the hya) is used for demonstrating a relation between two entities that are linked together in a way. Thus, we can say that Ezafe has undergone a kind of subjectification (see Langacker 2009, p.85) through which the relative pronoun (that was to illustrate identification and correspondence between the trajector and a participant in the relative clause) has metamorphosed into a morpheme evoking a schematic model of essential relationship between two participants within a nominal phrase. Through this subjectification, the identification of the sentential trajector with the participant of the relative clause has been turned into any kind of relationship held between two participants in a phrase. Let’s consider the following examples in this case:
Hemn’s hand
eating of apple
Ali’s running
necklace of gold
city of Bokan
Ali’s competitor
Hasan’s book
Hemɵn’s father
Hemɵn Mokryani
The question crossing the author’s mind is that what kind of relationship is evoked by the Ezafe linker that is capable of covering all of these various meninges such as possession, part-whole, participant-event, object-material, nominal collocation, and pure association. It may be discussed that Ezafe evokes a schematic intrinsic relationship that can convey different kinds of semantic association. However, it should be noted that this schematic interconnection is not semantically vacuous. In other words, the linear order of the words in the Ezafe construction cannot be modified, it is because some semantic restrictions dominate this conceptual relationship.
It was argued that Ezafe is the result of the grammaticalization of a relative pronoun by which the pivot and a participant in the relative clause are matched with one another. The pivot and the relevant participant are characterized by a conceptual contiguity. Accordingly, Ezafe has been gradually turned into an element evoking an asymmetric relationship between contiguous entities within a single phrase (N Ez N; N Ez adje; N Ez preposition; N Ez nominalized verb). However, we showed that this schematic relation is not bound to nominal phrases, but it can play a significant semantic role in the sentential level. As a result, two different constructions such as predicative Ezafe and topicalizing Ezafe were introduced in the paper. In these constructions, the Ezafe mediates between an element and the rest of the sentence. In other words, one of the sentential elements acts as a reference point for the whole sentence. As a result, the conceptualizer gains a mental access to the sentence only via the linguistic element (such as topic) which plays the role of reference point. The common attribute among these various grammatical constructions refers to the intrinsic relationship held between the entities.
1. Introduction
The Cognitive Linguistics approach is considered as a new approach in linguistics (Langacker 1987; Lakoff and Johnson 1980) which tries to explain linguistic phenomena according to cognitive processes without drawing a strict boundary and limitation between linguistic and non-linguistics capabilities. Rejecting the modularity of grammar, it ties to explain syntactic constructions according to the same cognitive processes that are used in non-linguistic phenomena. In harmony with this approach, we try to explain Ezafe construction in Kurdish from a cognitive perspective. In other words, we try to explain the fundamental cognitive processes underlying this frequent and important construction.
The traditional grammarians (Qharib, et al. 1971: 39-45; Moiin 1984; Anvari and Ahmadi-Givi,2011: 134- 138) have described Ezafe as a pure relationship between two entities that may convey a wide variety of meanings. They (ibid) have proposed many functions and senses for Ezafe in Iranian languages. Its numerous functions have been described as Eazfe for possession (ezafeye melki: ketābe ʔali: Ali’s book), Ezafe for expressing the material of a nominal head (ezafeye bayāni: halqeye talā: ring of gold), Ezafe for specifying a noun (ezafeye taxsisi: mize motāleʔe: table for studying), Ezafe for elaborating on the noun (ezafeye tozihi: ŝahre tehrān: city of Tehran) and kinship Ezafe (ezafeye bonovvat: mādar-e ʔisā: mother of Jesus). However, its real semantic and syntactic diversity goes beyond this number. Ezafe linker covers not only a variety of semantic relationships, but also it is used in different grammatical constructions including nominal phrase (nominal collocation: noun Ez noun and nominal periphrasis: noun Ez nominalized verb), prepositional phrase (preposition Ez noun), predicative Ezafe (determiner noun EZ noun copular verb), topicalized structure (topic Ez proposition) and Ezafe for modification by an adjective (noun Ez adjective). This semantic and syntactic diversity leads the formal linguists to consider it as a vacuous element emerging just because of formal computations and structural restrictions (Samiian 1994; Ghomeshi 1997; Samvelian 2005; Karimi 2007; Kahnemuyipour 2014).
The Ezafe construction has been traced back to the (h)ya as a relative pronoun in Old Persian (Moiin 1984: 8-9; 18; Abolqhasemi 2006: 38). The cognitive function of this relative pronoun was for identifying the trajector with another participant in the relative clause. The following example (inscription of Darius at the Naqsh-i-Rostam (DNa)) illustrates the function of hay in Old Persian:
baga vazraka Auramazdā hya imām būmim adā,
the god great Ahuramazda who this earth created
hya avam asmānam adā,
who this sky created
hya martiyam adā, hya šiyātim adā martiyahyā, hya Dārayavaum
who mankind created, who happiness created for mankind, who Darius
xšāyaθiyam akunauš.
king made.
Great god is Ahuramazda, who created the earth, who created the sky, who created the man, who created happiness for man, who made Darius king.
It may be argued that the main and primary function of hya is to make a linguistic coordination between two entities that are conceptually parallel and co-equal. However, this relative pronoun undergoes a drastic change in modern Kurdish. It can illustrate any possible relationship between two participants within a single noun phrase. In other words, the Ezafe (as the successor of the hya) is used for demonstrating a relation between two entities that are linked together in a way. Thus, we can say that Ezafe has undergone a kind of subjectification (see Langacker 2009, p.85) through which the relative pronoun (that was to illustrate identification and correspondence between the trajector and a participant in the relative clause) has metamorphosed into a morpheme evoking a schematic model of essential relationship between two participants within a nominal phrase. Through this subjectification, the identification of the sentential trajector with the participant of the relative clause has been turned into any kind of relationship held between two participants in a phrase. Let’s consider the following examples in this case:
- dæst-i hemən (part-whole)
Hemn’s hand
- xwardən-i sef (part (patient)-whole (event))
eating of apple
- Halatn-i Ali (part (agent)-whole (event))
Ali’s running
- gærdænbænd-i tæɬa (material)
necklace of gold
- ŝār-i bokān (identification)
city of Bokan
- raqib-i ʔæli (association)
Ali’s competitor
- ktew-i hæsæn (ownership)
Hasan’s book
- bāwk-i hemən (kinship)
Hemɵn’s father
- hemɵn-i mokryani (nominal collocation)
Hemɵn Mokryani
The question crossing the author’s mind is that what kind of relationship is evoked by the Ezafe linker that is capable of covering all of these various meninges such as possession, part-whole, participant-event, object-material, nominal collocation, and pure association. It may be discussed that Ezafe evokes a schematic intrinsic relationship that can convey different kinds of semantic association. However, it should be noted that this schematic interconnection is not semantically vacuous. In other words, the linear order of the words in the Ezafe construction cannot be modified, it is because some semantic restrictions dominate this conceptual relationship.
- Literature Review
- Methodology
- Results
It was argued that Ezafe is the result of the grammaticalization of a relative pronoun by which the pivot and a participant in the relative clause are matched with one another. The pivot and the relevant participant are characterized by a conceptual contiguity. Accordingly, Ezafe has been gradually turned into an element evoking an asymmetric relationship between contiguous entities within a single phrase (N Ez N; N Ez adje; N Ez preposition; N Ez nominalized verb). However, we showed that this schematic relation is not bound to nominal phrases, but it can play a significant semantic role in the sentential level. As a result, two different constructions such as predicative Ezafe and topicalizing Ezafe were introduced in the paper. In these constructions, the Ezafe mediates between an element and the rest of the sentence. In other words, one of the sentential elements acts as a reference point for the whole sentence. As a result, the conceptualizer gains a mental access to the sentence only via the linguistic element (such as topic) which plays the role of reference point. The common attribute among these various grammatical constructions refers to the intrinsic relationship held between the entities.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |