Syntactic Representation of Modal Verbs âbayestÃ¦n and Å¡odÃ¦nâ in Persian

Motavallian Naeini, Rezvan

Syntactic Representation of Modal Verbs âbayestÃ¦n and Å¡odÃ¦nâ in Persian

Author

R. Motavallian Naeini

Assistant Professor of Linguistics, University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

In this article, considering syntactic and semantic behavior of central modal verbs (Bayestæn, Šodæn) in Persian, we try to make a suitable decision about these verbs by demonstrating whether they are control or raising verbs. Based on previous point of views, we proposed three hypotheses: a) epistemic modals are raising and root modals including deontic and dynamic modals are control verbs b) epistemic and indirect deontic root modals having external participant are raising but dynamic and direct deontic root modals having internal participant are control verbs c) all kinds of models are raising verbs. In this article, using semantic and syntactic accounts, we concluded central modals which all of them are propositional in Persian, whether epistemic or root and whether internal or external participant are raising.

Keywords

Epistemic

Root

raising

Control

Central modals

اخلاقی، فریار. (1386). «بایستن، شدن و توانستن: سه فعل وجهی در فارسی امروز». مجله دستور. ش 3. صص 82ـ132.

باطنی، محمدرضا. (1354). مسائل زبانشناسی نوین (ده مقاله). تهران: آگاه.

غلامعلیزاده، خسرو. (1374). ساخت زبان فارسی. تهران: احیاء کتاب.

مشکوةالدینی، مهدی. (1379). دستور زبان فارسی برپایۀ نظریۀ گشتاری. مشهد: انتشارات دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد.

داوری، شادی. (1394). «از اجبار تا یقین؛ تکوین و تحول معانی وجهی «باید» براساس فرآیند معینشدگی». جشن‌نامۀ دکتر کورش صفوی. به‌کوشش مهرداد نغزگوی کهن و محمد راسخ‌مهند. تهران: سیاهرود.

درزی، علی. (1388). «حالت و تطابق در ساخت ارتقا از درون جملات خودایستا». مجلۀ دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی. دانشگاه تهران. س 60. پیاپی 189. صص 73ـ109.

رحیمیان، جلال و محمد عموزاده. (1392). «افعال وجهی در زبان فارسی و بیان وجهیت». پژوهشهای زبانی. د 4. ش 1. صص 21ـ40.

کریمیدوستان، غلامحسین و نگین ایلخانیپور. (1391). «نظام وجهیت در زبان فارسی». پژوهشهای زبانی. د 3. ش 1. صص 77ـ98.

عموزاده، محمد و حدائق رضایی. (1389). «ابعاد معناشناختی «باید» در زبان فارسی». پژوهشهای زبانی. ش 1. صص 57ـ78.

عموزاده، محمد و شادی شاه‌ناصری. (1390). «بررسی پیامدهای ترجمه از انگلیسی بر مقولۀ وجهیت در فارسی». پژوهشهای زبانی. د 1. ش 2. صص 21ـ50.

متولیان، رضوان. (1394). «توزیع ضمیر مستتر در ساخت کنترل اجباری». جستارهای زبانی. د 6. ش 1. صص 253ـ280.

Adger, D. (1997). Back to Modals: Some Cross-linguistic Generalisations. Talk delivered at the Department of Linguistics, University College London, Fall.

Bache, C. & N. Davidsen-Nielsen (1997). Mastering English. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Barbiers, S. (2006). “The syntax of modal auxiliaries”. in M. Everaert and H. van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, Vol. 5.( Pp. 1–22). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing,.

Bhat, D.N.S. (1999). The Prominence of Tense, Aspect and Mood. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Brennan, V. (1993). Root and Epistemic Modal Auxiliary Verbs.Doctoral Dissertation,University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Brown, K. (1991). “Double modals in Hawick Scots”. In P. Trudgill and J. Chambers (eds.), Dialects of English (Pp. 74-103). London: Longman,.

Bybee, J. & S. Fleischman (1995). “Modality in grammar and discourse: An introductory essay”. In J, Bybee, S,Fleischman (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse (Pp 1-14). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and Functional Heads: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Oxford :Oxford University Press.

Coates, J. (1983). The Semantics of The Modal Auxiliaries. London and Canberra: Croom Helm.

Darzi, A. & R. Motavallian (2010). “The minimal distance principle and obligatory control In Persian”. Language Sciences. 32. Pp. 488-504.

Drubig, H.B. (2001). On the Syntactic form of Epistemic Modality. Ms, University of Tübingen.

Eide, Kristin M. (2002). Norwegian Modals, Doctoral Dissertation, Linguistics Dept. NTNU, Trondheim.

Halliday, M., (1970). “Functional diversity in language as seen from a consideration of modality and mood in English”.Foundations of Language. 6. Pp. 322–361.

Heine, B. (1995). “Agent-oriented vs. epistemic modality: Some observations on German modals”. In J. Bybee and S. Fleischman,( eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse ( pp. 17-53). Amsterdam: Benjamins,.

Hofmann, T.R. (1966). “Past Tense Replacement and the Modal System” reprinted in McCawley, J. (ed.), Syntax and Semantics Vol.7 . New York: Academic Munksgaard. ress.

Huddleston, R. (1974). “Further remarks on the analysis of auxiliaries as main verbs” in Foundations of .U m u.agg. 11. Pp. 215-229.

Huddleston, R.; G. K. Pullum et. al., (eds.). 2002. Cambridge grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jackendoff, R. (1972). Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Langendoen, D. Terence (2002). On the Syntactic Form of Epistemic Modality. Ms: http://dingo.sbs.arizona.edu/

Palmer, F. (1986). Mood and Modality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Palmer, F.R. (1990). Modality and the English Modals. 2nd edn. London and New York: Longman.

Palmer, F.R. (1995). “Negation and the modals of possibility and necessity”. In J. L. Bybee and S. Fleischman (eds.), Modality in Grammar and Discourse ( Pp.453–471). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins,.

Palmer, F.R. (2001). Mood and Modality. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Papafragou, A. (2000). Modality: Issues in the Semantics–pragmatics Interface. Amsterdam and New York: Elsevier Science.

Perlmutter, D. (1970). “The two verbs begin in Jacobs”. R. and P.S. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in English Transformational Grammar .Boston: Ginn.

Perlmutter, D. (1971). Deep and Surface Structure Constraints in Syntax. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York.

Pullum, G. & W. Deirdre (1977). “Autonomous syntax and the analysis of auxiliaries”. Language 53.Pp. 741–788.

Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in Italian Syntax, Dordrecht: Foris.

Roberts, I. (1985). “Agreement parameters and the development of English modal auxiliaries”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theor. 3.Pp. 21-58.

Ross, J. (1969). “Auxiliaries as main verbs”. In W.Todd, (ed.) Studies in Philosophical Linguistics, Series I. Great Expectations Press, Evanston, IL.

Ruwet, N. (1991). “Raising and control revisited”. In J. Goldsmith and transl (eds.) Syntax and Human Experience (Pp. 56-81) , Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

Schepper, Kees de Joost Zwarts (2009). “Modal geometry: remarks on the structure of a modal map In Hogeweg”. Lotte, Helen de Hoop and Andrej Malchukov (eds.), Cross-linguistic Semantics of Tense, Aspect, and Modality. 2009 vii, 406 . (Pp. 245–270).

Steedman, M. (1977). “Verbs, time, and modality”. Cognitive Science. 1.Pp. 216-234.

Taleghani, A.H. (2008). Modality, aspect and Negation In Persian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins B.V.

Tavangar, M. & M. Amouzadeh (2009). “Subjective modality and tense In Persian”. Language Sciences. 31.Pp. 853–873

Van der Auwera, J. & V.A. Plungian (1998). “Modality’s semantic map”. Linguistic Typology 2. Pp. 79–124

Wurmbrand, S. & J. Bobaljik (1999). “Modals, Raising and A-reconstruction”. Handout of a talk given at Leiden University (October 1999) and at the University of Salzburg (December 1999).

Wurmbrand, S. (2001). Infinitives. Restructuring and Clause Structure. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Wurmbrand, Susi (1999). “Modal verbs must be raising verbs”. In S. Bird, A. Carnie, J. D. Haugen and P. Nordquest (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL18): 599-612.