Persian Agent Nouns Derived from –gar: A Construction Morphology Approach

Authors
A. Rafiei
H. Rezaei
Assistant Professor of Linguistics- University of Isfahan-Isfahan, Iran.
Abstract
In this paper, the authors deal with polysemy of a Persian suffix, –gar, its development, and some non-compositional aspects of meanings of the words derived from it. –gar is a productive agentive suffix in Persian deriving deverbal/denominal agent nouns and adjectives. The polysemous derived agent nouns are categorized as human agent nouns, human agent nouns denoting an occupation and non-human agent nouns (instruments). We investigate this polysemy in the framework of Construction Morphology (Booij, 2010). Construction Morphology provides a framework for proper account of word formation processes, in particular derivation, by employing a lexeme-based approach and by considering some morphological schemas/constructions in word formation.

Present analysis is based on a data set extracted from diachronic and synchronic corpora. First, a collection of 124 words derived from –gar was extracted from two dictionaries of Sokhan and Zansou (a Persian reveres dictionary) as well as from Persian Linguistic Database (PLDB). Present work also takes into account a diachronic perspective by searching the collected non-human agent nouns (instruments) in the diachronic corpus of Farhanyar, which contains literary works spanning from 9th century up to the present century and is the only diachronic corpus in Persian. The collected nouns were subsequently assigned to different categories of general human agents, human agents denoting a job, and non-human agents (instruments) based on their semantic variations. Meaning of ‘human agent of a regular and distinguished action related to the meaning of the base’ was assigned to [x-gar] construction as a prototypical meaning and a starting point for the ramification. The authors propose here that the development of instrument sub-schema- as a recent development in function of gar- is due to the influence of English loan words derived from –er. It seems that the mechanism behind this development is approximation i.e. the metaphoric extension at patterns level and not at the words level. The authors also argue that words with meanings of job and non-job agentive nouns are derived from two independent sub-schemas

Keywords

Subjects

• Abbasi, Z. (2017). “Analyzing complex words in Persian in Construction Morphology and Lexical Morphology/Phonology”. Language Related Research. 8 (3). Pp. 67-93. [In Persian].
• Anvari, H. (2002). Sokhan Dictionary (8 Volumes). Tehran: Sokhan .[In Persian].
• Arcodia, Giorgio Francesco, (2014), “Diachrony and the Polysemy of Derivational Affixes”. In F. Rainer, F. Gardani, H. C. Luschützky & W. U. Dressler (eds.), Morphology and Meaning (127-139). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Azimdokht, Z. & A. Rafiei, (2017), “Compound words ending in present stem based on Construction Morphology: A case of [x-yab] ”. Proceedings of 4th National Conference on Morphology, Tehran: Neveeseh Parsi .[In Persian].
• Beard, R. (1990). “The nature and origins of derivational polysemy”. Lingua 81.Pp. 101–140.
• Booij, G. & R. Lieber, (2004), “On the paradigmatic nature of affixal semantics in English and Dutch”. Linguistic. 327-357.
• Booij, G. (1986). “Form and meaning in morphology: the case of Dutch "Agent" nouns”. Linguistics. 24.Pp. 503-517.
• Booij, G. (2008). “Construction Morphology and the Lexicon”. In F. Montermini, G. Boyé, and N. Hathout (eds), Selected Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
• Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Booij, G. (2010b). “Construction morphology”. Language and Linguistics. 3(1). Pp. 1-13.
• Booij, G. (2015). “Construction Morphology”. In. A. Hippisley & G. T. Stump (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology, 424-448. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Booij, G. (2015). “Construction Morphology”. In. A. Hippisley & G. T. Stump (eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Morphology, 424-448. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Booij, G. (2005). The Grammar of Words (1st edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Booij, G. (2010a). Construction Morphology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Croft, W. (2007). “Construction Grammar”. In D. Geerarerts & H. Cuykens (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of cognitive linguistics. 463- 509. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fabb, N. (1984). Syntactic Affixation. Cambridge, MA: MIT PhD Dissertation.
• Ghaderi, S. & A. Rafiei , (1993), “Coercion and construction grammar”. Language Related Research. 8 (7) :183-208. [In Persian].
• Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
• Kashani, Kh. (2018). “Zansu Reverse Persian Dictionary”. Tehran: Markaz Nashre Daneshgah .[In Persian].
• Keyser, S. J. & T. Roeper, (1984), “On the middle and ergative constructions in English”. Linguistic Inquiry. 15. Pp.381-416.
• Lieber, Rochelle, (2004), Morphology and Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: CUP.
• Lüdtke, J. (2005). Romanische Wortbildung. Inhaltlich – diachronisch – synchronisch. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.
• Luschützky, H. Ch. & F. Rainer, (2011),“Agent noun polysemy in cross- linguistic perspective”. Language Typology and Universals. 64(4).Pp. 287-338.
• Luschützky, H. C.(2011). “Agent-Noun Polysemy in Slavic: Some Examples”. In: Luschützky,Hans C.& Rainer,Franz (eds.), Agent noun polysemy in Indo-European languages. Special issue of Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 64(1). Pp. 75–97.
• Meyer- Lübke, W. (1890). Italienische Grammatik. Leipzig.
• Panagl, O. (1978). “Agens und Instrument in der Wortbildung”. In W. U. Dressler & W. Meid (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Linguists. Vienna,August 28- Septembre 2, 1977, 453- 456. Innsbruck: Innsbrucker Beitrage zur Sprachwissenschaft.
• Panagl, O. (1975). “Kasustheorie und Nomina Agentis”. In H. Rix (ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung. Akten der V. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Regensburg, 9 – 14 September 1973, 232 – 146. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
• Rafiei, A. & S. Torabi, (2014), “Inheritance and motivation of form and meaning in lexicon: Instantiations of Persian word formation patterns". Science of Language, 2 (3) .[In Persian].
• Rafiei, A. (2008). “A Study of the Semantics of Persian Derivational Suffixes”. Ph.D Dissertation, Allameh Tabataba’i University. [In Persian].
• Rafiei, A. (2012). “Construction Morphology: Some evidence from Persian word formation”. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Linguistics, Tehran: Allameh Tabataba’i University. [In Persian].
• Rainer, f. (2004a). ”Del nombre de agente al nombre de instrument en español: ¿Cómo y cuándo? ”. Iberoromania. 59. Pp. 97-122.
• Rainer, F. (2004b). “L'origine dei nomi di strumento italiani in –tor". In Krisch, Th; Lindner, Th & Müller, U. (eds.), Analecta homini universali dicata. Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65. Geburtstag. Vol.1. Stuttgart: Heinz. Pp. 399- 424.
• Rainer, F. (2005). “Semantic change in word formation”. Linguistics. 43.2. Pp. 415-441.
• Rainer, F. (2011). “The agent- instrument- place ''polysemy'' of the suffix –TOR in Romance”. Language Typology and Universals. Persian Academy letter (special issue). 1. Pp. 5-12.
• Rainer, F. (2014). “Polysemy in Derivation”. In The Oxford Handbook of Derivational Morphology, Oxford: OUP.
• Sadeghi, A. (1991-1993). Ways and Possibilities of Word Formation in Contemporary Persian. Tehran: Nashr-e Danesh, (12 Articles) .[In Persian].
• Tabataba'i, A. (2003). A General Description of Word Formation Processes in Persian. Tehran: Nashr-e Danesh, 21 (3). [In Persian].
• Tabataba'i, A. (2003). Persian Noun and Adjective Compounds. Tehran: Markaz Nashre Daneshgahi [In Persian].
• Torabi, S. (2014). Semantic study of Persian Agent suffixes in the framework of Construction Morphology. MA dissertation, University of Isfahan. [In Persian].
• Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Graeme Trousdale, (2013), Constructionalization and Constructional Changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Vahedi Langrudi, M. & M. Ghaderi, (2010), “Argument structure of Persian derivational words”. Language Studies, 1 (1). Pp. 57- 74 [In Persian].
Language Related Research
Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 51
July and August 2019
Pages 71-94