Review and comparison of clitic in Russian and Persian languages

Document Type : مقالات علمی پژوهشی

Authors
M. Eskandari 1
A. Saeidi 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Russian Language and Literature, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Allameh Tabatabai University
2 PhD in Russian Language Teaching, Department of Russian Language and Literature, Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literature, University of Tehran
10.29252/LRR.14.6.9
Abstract
The word "clitic" refers to the dependent unit, that depends phonologically on another word or phrase, which is the interface between bound and free morphemes, exists in all languages of the world, and can be divided into types of proclitic, enclitic and endoclitic. In this article, the types of clitic in Persian and Russian languages have been studied and compared with each other, and the similarities and differences between them have been expressed based on the analytical-descriptive method. According to the findings of Iranian linguists, nine enclitics and one proclitic are recognizable in Persian and there is no endoclitic in this language, but in addition to the existence of several endoclitics in Russian, the number of enclitics and proclitics in this language is more than their number in Persian. Many prepositions in Russian are proclitics, but none of the Persian prepositions are proclitics. The reason for this is the different types of stress in these two languages, because prepositions and conjunctions in Persian have stress, but many prepositions, especially monosyllabic prepositions, in Russian do not have stress or their stress depend on the nearby word and are considered a proclitic.



1. Introduction

The word "clitic" refers to the dependent unit, that depends phonologically on another word or phrase, which is the interface between bound and free morphemes, exists in all languages ​​of the world, and can be divided into types of proclitic, enclitic and endoclitic. In morphology and syntax, a clitic is a morpheme that has syntactic characteristics of a word, but depends phonologically on another word or phrase. In this sense, it is syntactically independent but phonologically dependent—always connected to a host. A clitic is pronounced like an affix, but plays a syntactic role at the phrase level. In other words, clitics have the form of affixes, but the distribution of function words. For example, the contracted forms of the auxiliary verbs in I'm and we've are clitics.



1.2. Research Question(s)

In this article we try to compare the types of clitics, i.e. enclitics, endoclitics and proclitics in Russian and Persian, and find the similarities and differences between them. The questions we seek to answer in this study are: What are the types of clitics in Russian and Persian languages? What are the differences and similarities between the use of clitics in these two languages? Is there endoclitic, as a clitic that exists in a small number of languages, in these two languages or not?



2. Literature Review

In the Persian language, Kalbasi (1992, p.24-25), Shaghaghi (2013), Meshkatuddini (2005, p.18), Rasekh Mohand (2005, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010), Sarahi and Alinejad (2013), Naghzguy Kohan (2014), Bahrami and Rezaei (2013), Mahmudi (2013) and ..., and in the Russian language, researchers such as Zaliznyak (2005), Mironova (2015), Zimmerling (2018), Valova (2016), Zimmerling and Liutikova (2016), Tamilina (2018), Duykina et al. have studied the clitics and have created works.

3. Methodology

In this article, the types of clitic in Persian and Russian languages ​​have been studied and compared with each other, and the similarities and differences between them have been expressed based on the analytical-descriptive method.



4. Results

According to the findings of Iranian linguists, nine enclitics and one proclitic are recognized in Persian and there is no endoclitic in this language, but in addition to the existence of several endoclitics in Russian, the number of enclitics and proclitics in this language is more than their number in Persian. Many prepositions in Russian are proclitics, but none of the Persian prepositions are proclitics. The reason for this is the different types of stress in these two languages because prepositions and conjunctions in Persian have stress, but many prepositions, especially monosyllabic prepositions, in Russian, do not have stress or their stress depends on the nearby word and are considered a proclitic.

Although the enclitics and proclitics of Russian and Persian are different from each other, the existence and use of them in these two languages ​​have been proven. There is no endoclitic in Persian, but this type of clitics exists in Russian and is used.

The number of proclitics in Russian is much more than the number in Persian, and this is due to the lack of stress on many prepositions and conjunctions in Russian, as mentioned, lack of stress is the main characteristic of clitics.

Some conjunctions and prepositions in Russian can be used as clitic due to lack of stress, but this is not possible in Persian, because prepositions and conjunctions in Persian have stress and cannot be clitics.

In the Persian language, clitics refer to structural and syntactic relations, for example, they can be possessive modifiers or direct objects, and so on. In the Russian language as well as the Persian language, clitics, which consist of conjunctions, prepositions, and particles, are used to express grammatical relationships at the sentence level. In other words, clitics are similar in terms of semantic function in Russian and Persian languages.

Keywords

Subjects

Adamchik, N.V. (2008). The Most Complete Russian Language Course. Minsk: Harvest.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. (2003). “Typological parameters for the study of clitics, with special reference to Tariana”, Pp 42-78 of Word: A Cross-Linguistic Typology, edited by R.N.W. Dixon and Alexandra Aikhenvald. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Akhvlediani G.S. (1963). “Pre-verbal Tmesis in the Ossetian language” // Brief Messages of the Institute of the Peoples of Asia. 67. Iranian Philology. M .: Publishing house of oriental literature. C. 11-15.
Arkadiev, P.M. (2016). “On the Question of Endoclitics in the Russian Language” // Clause Architecture in Parametric Models: Syntax, Information Structure, Word Order / Ed. A.V. Zimmerling, E.A. Lutikova. M.: Languages of Slavic Culture (LSC). C. 325-331.
Dolbik, E.E., V.L. Leonovich, L.R. Suprun-Belevich. (2010). Modern Russian Language: a Chrestomathy. In 3 Parts. Part 3. Syntax / comp.: E.E. Dolbik, V.L. Leonovich, L.R. Suprun-Belevich. - Minsk: BGU. - 295 p.
Evseeva, I.V., T.A. Luzgina, I.A. Slavkina, F.V. Stepanova. (2007). Modern Russian Language: Course of Lectures / I.V. Evseeva, T.A. Luzgina, I.A. Slavkina, F.V. Stepanova; Ed. I.A. Slavkina. - Krasnoyarsk: Siberian Federal University. - 642 p.
Ganenkov, D.S., Yu.A. Lander, T.A. Maysak (2012). “The Udinian Language Without Endoclitics”. Lecture at the Institute of Contemporary Linguistic Research at the Moscow State University for the Humanities M. A. Sholokhova, March 16, 2012. http://udilang.narod.ru/field/Udi_mggu_2012.pdf.
Ganiev, Zh.V. (2012). Modern Russian Language: Phonetics, Graphics, Orthography, Orthoepy: Textbook. / Zh.V. Ganiev. - M.: - 200 p.
Islami, Muharram. (2009). “Stress in Persian Language”. Two Quarterly Journal of Sign and Data Processing. No. 1, (11). Pp. 3-12, p. 10.
Jam, Bashir. (2015). “Explaining the Change in Pronunciation of the Enclitic Verb / -ast / in Various Contexts in the Framework of the Optimality Theory”. Linguistic Researches. Article 2, Volume 6, No. 1, Spring and Summer. Pp. 21-40.
Kalbasi, Iran. (1992). Derivative Construction of the Word in Contemporary Persian. Tehran: Institute of Humanities and Cultural Studies.
Katamba, F. (1993) Morphology. London: Macmillan Press LTD.
Mohammadi, Mohammad Reza, Dad, Masoumeh. (2009). “Stress in Russian and Persian words and their interaction from the perspective of Persian language learners”. Journal of Linguistic Research. Volume 1, No. 3. Pp. 153-169.
Naghz Kohan Guy, Mehrdad. (2014). “From Clitic to Derivative Affix”. Article Collection of Allameh Tabatabai University. No. 332. Pp. 1345-1350.
Plungyan, V.A. (2003). General Morphology. Introduction to the Problematic. Tutorial. - 2nd ed., Rev. - M.: Editorial URSS Pub. - 384 p.
Sarahi, Mohammad Amin, Ali Nejad, Batool. (2013). “Typology of Clitics in Persian Language”. Journal of Khorasan Linguistics and Dialects, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. No. 1, Spring and Summer. Pp. 103-130.
Selezneva, L.B. (1999). Modern Russian: System of basic Concepts: Textbook: In 2 Parts/ Under total. ed. L. B. Selezneva. Part 2: Morphology. Syntax / Comp. F.P. Sergeev, O.V. Chizhikova. - Volgograd: VolSU Publishing House. - 120 p.
Shansky, N.M., V.V. Ivanov. (1987). Modern Russian Language. Textbook. for Students of Pedagogy Institutes, by Specialty. No. 2101 "Rus. lang. and lit.", In 3 Parts. Part 1. Introduction. Vocabulary. Phraseology. Phonetics. Graphics and Oрфография / N.M. Shansky, V.V. Ivanov. - 2nd ed., Rev. - M.: Prosveshenie Pub. -192 p.
Shaqaqi, Vida. (1995). “What is a Clitic?, Is There Such a Concept in Persian?”. Article Collection of Allameh Tabatabai University. March. No. 83. Pp. 141-158.
Shaqaqi, Vida. (2013). “Group Affix”. Journal of Language and Linguistics, Volume 9, Spring and Summer. No. 17. Pp. 1-26.
Shaqaqi, Vida. (2013). “Second-position clitic in Persian” // Article Collection of the First National Conference: A Study of Clitics in Iranian Languages. By the efforts of Mohammad Rasekh Mahand. Linguistics Society of Iran, Tehran: Nashre Nevise Pub., Pp. 13-35.
Shvedova, N.Yu. (editor-in-chief) and Others. (1980). Russian Grammar: USSR Academy of Sciences, Russian Language Institute. - M.: Nauka Pub. Volume 1. p. 137.
Valova, E.A. (2016). Positional Properties of Enclitic Particles: a Corpus Experimental Study on the Example of the Particle "же". Dissertation for the Degree of Candidate of Philological Sciences: 10.02.19 - Theory of language. - National Research University: Higher School of Economics. - Moscow. - 218 Pp.
Zaliznyak, A.A. (1967). Russian Nominal Inflection. - M .: Nauka Pub.
Zaliznyak, A.A. (1993). “To the Study of the Language of Birch bark Manuscripts” // Yanin V.L., Zaliznyak A.A. Novgorod Manuscripts on Birch bark from Excavations 1984-1989. M.: Nauka Pub. 352 p.
Zaliznyak, A.A. (2004). A word about Igor's regiment. Linguist's view. M.: Languages of Slavic Culture Pub. 352 p.
Zaliznyak, A.A. “Some Problems of Word Order in the History of the Russian Language” // Lecture at the School "Moomi-troll", Read on November 18, 2005. https://elementy.ru/nauchno-populyarnaya_biblioteka/431049.
Zaliznyak, A.A. (2008). Old Russian Enclitics. M.: Languages of Slavic Cultures Pub.
Zimmerling, A.V. (2018). “So it Should be: are Endoclitics Needed in the Description of Russian Grammar” // Russian Language in Scientific Coverage, vol. 36. No. 2 [Accepted for publication]. 159-179.
Zwicky, A. (1994). “Clitics”: Encyclopedia of language and linguistics ed. R.E. Asher Pergamon Press. vol.2, 571-576.
Zwicky, A. (1997). On clitics. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A7%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0_(%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%81%D1%82%D1%8C_%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B8)
Language Related Research
Volume 14, Issue 6 - Serial Number 78
January and February 2023
Pages 277-304