An investigation of clitic hosts in Ardalani kurdish based on Phase Theory

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Authors
1 Ph.D. Candidate in Linguistics, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of linguistics, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Phase Theory has been proposed as the latest achievement of the minimalist program to optimize syntactic computation of language.The purpose of this paper is to study and analyze of Ardalani Kurdish data and to what extent phase theory is useful in explaning the clitic hosts in Ardalani Kurdish. we showed that the explanation of clitic agreement in Ardalani would follow the principle of phase impenetrability condition . Data collection was based on field methods, library and the use of researcher language intuition. We also showed through a descriptive –analytical method based on theoretical framework of Citko (2014), the derivation of the phase of transitive single object phrases in Ardalani. The clitic hosts are limited to the complement of VP core in the first phase. Therefore, the elements that are in this range can be a good host for the matching word closure. Therefore the direct object and the non-passive component of the compound verb would be the best choice for the clitic. The clitic can also choose object-dependent adjectives and adverbs as hosts, provided that these elements are limited to the first phase. In this case, the clitic systematically selects these elements as the host. We also, by examining of the construction of adverbs, showed that there is restriction on the selection of adverbs and they are locally restricted. Whenever they are in the complement of the first phase, clitic will select them, but when they are outside the first phase, they can not be selected as hosts, and if selected, the sentence will be crashed. Finally, we concluded that phase theory is capable of explaining the clitic hosts in Ardalani



1. Introduction

Phase Theory has been proposed as the latest achievement of the minimalist program to optimize syntactic computation of language. At the end of each phase, part of the syntactic structure already formed, will be transferred to the phonological and semantic componant. Ultimately, according to the impenetrability condition(Chomsky 2000), only the head and specifier of the phase will be visible to further syntactic operations. This dissertation aims to study and analyze the Ardalani Kurdish data and to find that in what extent , the phase theory is valid in explaining the distribution of clitic hosts in Ardalani Kurdish. we showed that the explanation of clitic agreement in Ardalani would follow the principle of phase impenetrability condition . Data collection was based on field and library methods and the use of the researcher intuition. Through a descriptive –analytical method based on the theoretical framework of Citko (2014), this research is focused at the study of the derivation of transitive single and double object structures in Ardalani. Accordingly, the clitic hosts are limited to the complement of VP core in the first phase. Therefore, the elements that are in this range can be an appropriate host for the agreement clitic. Therefore, the direct object and the non-verbal component of the compound verb would be the best choice for the clitic. The clitic can also choose object-dependent adjectives and adverbs as hosts, provided that these elements are limited to the first phase. In this case, the clitic systematically selects these elements as the host.In this respect, adverbs are locally restricted on the selection of their hosts. Whenever advebs are in the domain of the complement of the first phase, clitics will select them, but when they are outside the first phase, like manner adverbs, they would not be selected as a host, and if they are selected, the sentence will be crashed and ungrammatical. As a result, we concluded that phase theory is adequate to explain how the clitics choose their hosts in Ardalani kurdish variety.

Keywords

Subjects


منابع
بدخشان، ابراهیم؛ کریمی، یادگار؛ رنجبر، روزیتا. (1393)، « حالت‌نمایی در کردی سورانی »، زبانشناسی و گویش‌های خراسان، شماره 2، صفحه 1-28.
حسینی، نرگس. (1395)، «توزیع واژه‌بست در زبان کردی اردلانی». پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه کردستان.
حیدری‌زادی، رضا؛ حسینی معصوم، سیدمحمد؛ نجفیان، آرزو؛ روشن، بلقیس.(1395)، «تحلیل یک نوع فعل مرکب فارسی بر اساس نظریه اشتقاق فاز»، زبانشناسی و گویش‌های خراسان، شماره 15، صفحه 53-74.
دبیرمقدم، محمد. (1392)، رده‌شناسی زبان‌های ایرانی(جلددوم)، تهران: ‌انتشارات سمت.
رنجبر، روزیتا. (1394)، «بررسی حالت و مطابقه در کردی سورانی( بانه‌ای و سنندجی)، رویکرد کمینه‌گرا». پایان‌نامه کارشناسی ارشد. دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.
رنجبر، روزیتا. (1397)، تبیین حالت و مطابقه درزبان کردی، تهران: انتشارات لوح محفوظ.
شقاقی،ویدا. (1374)، «واژه‌بست چیست؟آیا در زبان فارسی چنین مفهومی وجود دارد». مجموعه مقالات دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، شماره 83، صفحه 141-153.
کریمی، یادگار. (1393)، «نگاهی به میزبان‌گزینی واژه‌بست‌ها از منظر نظریه فاز». مجموعه مقالات دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی، شماره 332، 1027-1042.
محمد ابراهیمی، زینب و دانش‌پژوه، فاطمه.(1387)، «واژه‌بست و روابط نحوی ـ معنایی آن با فعل در زبان کردی(گویش سورانی)»، پژوهشنامه علوم انسانی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، شماره 58، صفحه145-168.

Bibiography
Baker, M. (2015). Case: Its Principles and Its parameters, Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky. N. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: the framework. In Martin, R., Michaels, D. & Uriagereka
Chomsky, N. (2001). Derivation by Phase. In M. Kenstowicz, Ken Hale: A Life in Language (pp. 1-54). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
A Three factors in language design. Linguistic Inquiry 36(1): 1–22.. Chomsky, N. (2005) Chomsky. N Chomsky, N .(2008). On phases. In Freidin, R., Otero, C. & Zubizarreta, M-L. (Eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Citko, Barbara. (2014). Phase Theory. Cambridge University Press.
Dabir-Moghaddm, M.(2012). Linguistic Typology: An Iranian perspective, Journal of Universal Language, V.13, pp. 31-70.
Dixon, R. (1994). Ergativity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Grohmann, Kleanthes K. (2009). Explorations of Phase Theory: Interpretation at the Interfaces, New York: Oxford University Press.
Holmberg, A.,& Odden, D. (2004). Ergativity and role-marking in Hawrami. Paper presented at Syntax of the world’s languages (SWL 1), Leipzig, Germany.
Karimi, Y. (2013). Extending Defective Intervention Effects. The Linguistic Review 30:1, 51-75.
Katamba, F. (1993). Morphology. London: Mcmillam Press LTD.
Kazemi, F. Ranjbar, R. (2019). Affixation in Ardalani Kurdish Based on Distributed Morphology, Theory and Practice in Language Studies,4, pp. 459-46.
Spencer, A. 7 & A. R. Luis. (2012). Clitic, an Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Syed, Saurov and Andrew Simpson. (2017). On the DP/NP status of nominal projections in Bangla: Consequences for the theory phases. Glossa: a journal of general linguistic 2(1):68, pp. 1-24.
Wackernagel, J. (1892). “UbereinGesetz der Indo-Germanischen Wortstellung”. IndogermanischeForschungen, 1, 333-436.
Woolford, E. (2006). Lexical Case, Inherent Case, and Argument Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37, 111–130.
Zwicky, A. (1977). On Clitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
Zwicky, A. & G. Pullum (1983). “Cliticization verses Inflection: English n t”. Language, 59, 502-13.
Zwicky, A. (1985). Clitks and particles. Language 61:283-305.