تاکید

Information, structure as well as phonetic, syntactic and semantic construction, has been one of the subjects of attention among linguists in recent years. Since information structure or , in other words, the way of distributing syntactic structures in dramatic texts is of great importance, the textual totality of the play ofool by Akbar Radi is used as linguistic data and as evidence in the analysis of the construction of information in sentences. To the knowledge of the authors of this research, no research has been conducted on the arrangement of sentence information in the dramatic genre; To this end, Akbar Radi's play entitled ofool was chosen as the corpus of research. The research method is descriptive-analytical. In order to analyze the informative structure of sentences, some phonetic, lexical and syntactic rules have been analyzed and summarized in this research. The findings revealed that this play is not the case of exception and encompasses all the advantages of this linguistic devices. In their own turn , these devices can be served to demonstrate staging, characterization and other dramatic thems. This linguistic devices are also used to serve the aesthetic aspects of the dramatic genre and create textual cohesion.

Each poet may emphasize certain topics and concepts. Naser Khosrow Qobadiani is one of the first poets of Persian language who used his poetry to promote and explain his religious and political beliefs. Therefore, there is a special intensity in his expression, which he realised through the use of emphasis. Emphasis is a subject that has two grammatical and rhetorical aspects, and it is presented in two parts: general and specific. In this article, the methods of emphasis in Naser Khosrow's poetry have been extracted, categorized, described and analyzed by the induction method of both parts. The general emphasis in his poems includes repetition of the same word, synonyms, descriptions, inflections, connections, exaggerations, contrasts, and brevity. Also, special emphasis includes methods of emphasizing nouns, pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, verbs, and sentences. The main purpose of his emphasis is to explain and highlight the issues and concepts that are considered true in his opinion, and by using those methods, he wants to provide the basis for persuasion and acceptance of the audience. In terms of the frequency, emphasis through repetition, especially with puns and foregrounding, is more frequent and also more creative. In the special emphasis, the emphasis of the verb and sentence has a special place in his poetry.

One of the mysteries that has always been raised in dictionaries and stylistics books is the use of the word "mar" in ancient texts. This word appears in dictionaries in such a way that uncertainty has been expressed about its definitive meaning, and only by considering evidence and context have they attempted to find its semantic boundaries. Upon examining dictionaries, no firm meaning was found for it. In Bahar's stylistics book, no definitive information is given about this word, and it deals with semantic boundaries and conjecture. This article, with due research caution, proposes that "mar" in all instances can be an abbreviation of "magar" (except/ unless). Just as "ar" is an abbreviation of "agar" (if). This "mar" (abbreviated form of magar) is still used in today's local dialects. In Kurdish, Laki, Luri, and Bakhtiari dictionaries, "mar" is considered an abbreviation of "magar" (except/ unless). Furthermore, "magar" (except/ unless) has been used in ancient texts in various meanings such as emphasis, doubt, question, exception, limitation, etc. Precisely, "mar" has also been used in these meanings. The present research, based on various examples, aims to seek and prove this matter.

The main purpose of this study is to explain the word order of topicalized constituents in non-pro.making persian topicalization based on Functional Discourse Grammar. Since this grammar does not believe in concepts such as movement, we will also seek to explain this process in base-generated procedures. Therefore, in this study, in order to achieve the above goals, the method of mapping the linguistic elements of sentences containing non-pro.making Persian topicalized constituents in morphosyntactic templates in four absolute initial, second, medial and final positions and infinite relative ones presented in Functional Discourse Grammar was considered. This study is based on a descriptive-analytical method and the examples are taken from selected samples of Persian speech and written texts, which after introducing the mechanisms of this grammar,have been analyzed based on the principles of this theory. The method of determining the order of constituents used in the present study is the dynamic method of FDG that is inspired by the method of determining the word order of Greenberg. In this approach instead of three categories of subject, object and verb, respectively, the concepts of actor, undergoer and predicate, determine the word order of the languages of the world. The results indicate that in marked constituents such as topicalization, considering the communicative intention of the speaker, various elements including ,thematic and non-thematic elements and even predicates can be topicalized and on the other hand, considering that, based on the principles of this grammar, the topicalized constituent in the interpersonal level is given priority in entering morphosyntactic templates, so the topicalization process is not the result of movement, but the topicalized element is produced in base-generated procedures in the same position. The results also show that Functional Discourse Grammar is an appropriate and efficient method by referring to the three principles of iconicity, domain integrity and functional stability in determining the constituent arrangement of sentences containing non-pro.making Persian topicalization.

There is a generative constructional process in both Persian and Kurdish languages, through which some syntactic constructions can be transformed from a simple expression to an emphatic expression without changing the original meaning. This process, which is the proof of a subject through the negation of other states, can be called “affirmative negation". “Sentence to express the concept of obligation", "sentence to express inclusion" and "positive news sentence in the present tense" are among the cases that are transformed from their fundamental and unmarked structure into a marked structure with specific verbal motivations. In this research, within the framework of the markedness approach, the marked form of the mentioned sentences in Persian and Kurdish languages is described and analyzed from the structural and functional aspects in order to determine their difference from the basic and unmarked form in terms of semantic function. The aim is to explain and prove the nature of the construction process of affirmative negation in Persian and Kurdish languages as a structural pattern and to show the performance of this process in construction from unmarked to markedness. The result of the research shows that marking in syntactic constructions does not occur only with the movement of sentence elements, but sometimes it is done through this process, which is one of the processes of emphasis.

One of the rhetorical features of language in writing and speaking is the emphasis on speech. Emphasis occurs in different ways. Nominal groups are one of the tools of emphasis that have received less attention so far. Focus groups in this article are groups in which either the word is made up of repeated phoneme or the word is made up of two or more morphemes or repeated words, or the contents of the group are combined or turned in a way that convey emphasis. Focus groups are accompanied by proportional nouns, synonymous nouns and adjectives, contrasting nouns and adjectives, proportional verbs, and words with musical proportions. This research through providing a list of samples consisting of 1,500 nominal groups, has analyzed their structure, features, origin and function and classified them into different categories. These groups are used for different purposes including creating new meanings, secondary meanings, metaphorical and figurative, expanding meaning, inclusion, circumlocution, brevity; however, it’s most important function is emphasis. Such as emphasizing on the importance of something; feelings and emotions, distance, quantity and quality and intensity.

In this article, for the first time we have studied "Focus" and its various types as one of the most important and most frequently used stylistic features in Nasir al-Din Shah Qajar's diaries with a linguistic, literary and stylistic approach, along with a descriptive - analytical - statistical method. For this purpose, first we have shown the most important methods of "Focus" in speech in the form of a diagram, divided in two parts: Morphology and Syntax, by using the most important opinions of researchers and our personal efforts as well; Then we have examined the most important methods of "Focus" in these notes. By analyzing the obtained data, we have shown a new aspect of Nasir al-Din Shah's personality; Finnaly by selecting random examples from the original copy and confronting the corrections made from these works, we have shown that the misreadings, misunderstandings and unexplained eliminations made by the editors in these corrections, have made them unreliable and invalid for literary and linguistic research..

In this study, based on data obtained from a number of languages and dialects of Iran (as well as a number of languages out of Iran due to the analysis and discussion of the article), the reduplication process has been investigated and analyzed in framework of the views of Inkelas and Zoll (2005). The main purpose of this research is to answer these two questions: What are the main functions of reduplication in languages and dialects of Iran? 2) What explanation can be given for the common functions of reduplication in different languages? To answer these questions, after raising the issue and stating the research methodology, first the previous researches are reviewed, then the research data are analyzed, and finally a series of discussions and conclusions is given. Analyses and discussions in the article show that in the languages and dialects studied, reduplication is used to add different meanings to the base. Research studies also show that nominalization is another common function of reduplication in languages and dialects of Iran. In addition, it has been argued that within the framework of Inkelas and Zoll, it is not possible to provide a satisfactory explanation for some of the data, therefore it is necessary to reorganize this pattern in order to explain more types of reduplication. In explaining the phenomenon of duplication, it has been argued that paying attention to the relationship between form and meaning in duplication is very helpful. Also, through the presentation of some data and their analysis, it has been said that binary structures based on onomatopoeia can also be considered as a kind of reduplication.

In addition to the main construction of oath in which one swears to someone or something, it has another form in Persian language. This kind of oath is a conditional construction which, at its first part, is provided with the subject of oath and at the second part, with the act of oath. In this paper, using the "speech act" theory in John Austin's point of view as a theoretical basis and by mentioning examples of literary works as well as examples of slang register, we will specify the conditional construction of oath. The results of the present research show that the form of conditional oath, in comparison with the main form, bears more emphasis and thus is further used in occasions that the addresser tends to emphasize on the subject. 

Oath in Persian has always had a special syntactic construction that has changed over time. The basic complete construction of swearing consists of the following components:  *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)  In this construction, the ‘noun’ is what is sworn by. The ‘sentence’ is subject of the oath, i.e. what the oath is taken for, such as: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I swear by the dust of your feet that I wish to die at your feet’ Apart from the main form mentioned above, the expression of an oath in Persian represents another form through a conditional construction. In a conditional swearing, the subject of the oath (i.e. what the oath is taken for) is stated in the dependent clause, and the act of swearing (i.e. what the oath is taken by) is included in the main clause.   

John Austin’s theory of “speech acts” suggests that, in the human language system, the speech inherently represents the performance of an act. In other words, the expression of words in itself is the doing of the action. Austin calls such speech ‘speech act’, i.e. the speech that carries an action. He argues that when a speaker utters a sentence, three levels of speech acts occur simultaneously: Locutionary act, Illocutionary act, and Perlocutionary act. Locutionary act is the meaningful phrases and sentences that are expressed. In illocutionary act, the speaker expresses phrases and sentences to encode a specific meaning. In the perlocutionary act, the speaker influences the audience through the speech. Austin divides the second speech act, i.e. illocutionary act, into five categories: 1. Verdictive: Acts that emphasize the speaker’s commitment to the truth of a proposition, such as ‘express’ and ‘estimate’ verbs. 2. Exercitive: Acts that indicate the exercise of power, right, sovereignty, will and influence and are expressed through such verbs as ‘choose’, ‘advise’, ‘order’, ‘appoint’ and ‘plead’ . 3. Commissive: Acts that indicate the speaker’s commitment to do something and, by expressing them, the speaker obliges oneself to do things. The verbs ‘promise’, ‘commit’ and ‘swear’ fall into this category. 4. Behabitive: Acts that show the types of social behaviors of language speakers, such as the verbs‘apologize’, ‘thank’, ‘sympathize’, ‘insult’, ‘humiliate’, etc. 5. Expositive: Acts that deal with how words are used in language and describe how speech is organized in the conversational process. This type of act includes the following verbs: ‘Argue’, ‘answer’, ‘assume’, ‘accept’ and ‘explain’. Taking of an oath or oath, which is the subject of this inquiry, belongs to the category of commissive acts in which the speaker takes an oath to express their commitment to an issue. Thus, from the point of view of the theory of speech acts, ‘swearing’ is an act that the speaker does with speech. The pragmatics and semantics of the syntactic construction in question confirm that although the form of speech is conditional, it is used for a certain act, which is the expression of an oath.

In this article, the nature and the status of the conditional construction of oath is examined with examples of classical and contemporary Persian literary works. To do this, with a comprehensive plan and a practical approach, we will examine the conditional construction of oath to understand how the components of this syntactic construction may change to encode a different meaning at different tenses and for first-person, second-person and third-person forms.   

What is needed to know about this type of oath is to answer the following two questions: 1- What is its syntactic form and what are its components? 2- How does each of the syntactic components of this type of swearing change, and in what ways can it be plotted? In other words, in different practical situations, what structural changes might occur in conditional oath constructions to produce different forms of this type of oath? The nature of the conditional type of oath is best revealed when comparing the following examples, which expresses the same subject in both types of oath: The common construction of swearing:   *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘I swear by my life that I will not break my covenant’ Conditional swearing: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘Broken be my back and my soul! If I break my covenant’ The meaning of both sentences is the same, but the way they are expressed is syntactically different. In the conditional construction, the speaker considers breaking the covenant as a curse upon themselves to show that they do not break the covenant. In this syntactic construction of swearing, the dependent clause in which the subject of the oath is raised is not limited in terms of tense: it is used for any subject in all three present, past and future tenses: Present: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘May I be a base-born if I have any other mistake than this’ Past: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article) • ‘May my poetry be ill-gotten if I had written only a poem in my life except with the echo of your name’ Future: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘I would be worse than a dog if I run after bread/sustenance like a dog’ The main clause can be expressed in three forms: ‘declarative’, ‘imperative’ and ‘exclamatory’, each of which can be converted into other forms. The possibility of converting these forms into one another form implies that the speaker feels free to express a story with three different constructions according to the situation: Main clause in the form of a declarative sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘I am ignoble if I go with a complain to a stranger’ Main clause in the form of an exclamatory sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘If I have been contaminated by the wine so far, may God’s lawful be unlawful to me!’ Main clause in the form of an imperative sentence: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)
• ‘If this deed of mine is not true, make me die a Jew God’ Although the expression of an oath through the conditional construction is possible in all three grammatical persons, i.e. first, second and third person, in both ‘singular’ and ‘plural’ forms, it is widely used in the first person (singular and plural) and its meaning is clearer in this form. This type of oath is rarely used in the second or third persons, and its meaning is not very clear: First person singular: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘My house may be ruined if I have said such a thing’ First person plural: *(To view this part of the text, refer to the end of the pdf file in the main article)• ‘We are not human if we relinquish our right’   

The present paper illustrated that oath in Persian is not limited to the major common construction rather it has long been encoded through conditionals on special occasions. The conditional construction of swearing in Persian is used for any subject in all three tenses of the past, present, and future, with slight differences in the first-, second- and third-person forms. The main clause in this type of oath expression is always in negative form and can be expressed in declarative, imperative, or exclamatory forms. Rhetorically, this type of oath is used widely in situations where the speaker emphasizes the subject in question and tends to reassure the audience about the subject by removing any doubts. Uncommon abbreviations: SUBJ = subjunctive; DECL = declarative; EXCL = exclamatory; IMPE = imperative; PRS = present; PST = past; FUT = future; PL = plural; SG = single.   

One of the important terms used in the Holy Quran is Shachr('39')an Pronoun, one that gives special emphasis to the speech “Kalam” and it is not used except in very important cases. Some scholars and commentators of the Qurchr('39')an have claimed in numerous cases that Shachr('39')an Pronoun is determined in some verses of the Qurchr('39')an and have brought arguments for this claim. In this paper, which has been carried out by a descriptive-analytical method, in order to examine the validity of this claim, it was first determined that the Shachr('39')an Pronoun, due to ambiguity, being a name and being a pillar of speech has an extraordinary emphatic meaning and goes beyond other means of emphasis, and in many ways cannot be compared. Therefore, the arguments of believers of Shachr('39')an Pronoun to be determined have been mentioned and reviewed in various cases. Then the disapproval of determination of the Shachr('39')an Pronoun in Arabic convention, the incompatibility of the emphasis with the omission and the lack of the need for the pronoun in the claimed cases have been mentioned and proved as incorrect arguments of the claimed pronouns.  In none of the claimed cases, a pronoun is not determined. Through examining the translations of Mesbahzadeh (literally), Mostafavi (free) and Meshkini (interpretive), it became clear that Mostafavichr('39')s translation is more accurate than other translations, and Meshkinichr('39')s translation on this issue is less accurate than other translations.

In literary texts, some sentences are more important than others and are thus, highlighted through emphasis. The current study aims at reviewing 3000 verses from Shahnameh to extract the methods and techniques of emphasis. The researcher seeks to find out what structural, rhetorical, or semantic devices are used in the Kamoos Keshani story to show emphasis. The data was collected deductively, and the data analysis was descriptive-analytic. This study categorized the emphasis in Shahnameh into two types: general emphasis and specific emphasis. General emphasis consists of reiteration, apposition, description, hyperbole, contrast, opposition, and limitation. Reiteration is an artistic repetition of the exact words, meanings, synonyms, and a combination of words and meanings. The combination occurs in the repetition of nouns, noun phrases, adjectives, adverbial clauses, and objects. The repetition of meaning or synonym consists of a semantic synonym of two verses. The emphasis of apposition happens through a series of consecutive words. In this study, the words such as 'many', 'hard', 'much', and 'numerous' are known as descriptive. These words function as adjectives if they follow a noun and function as an adverb if they follow a verb. Hyperbole and other related terms such as exaggeration have an implied usage in epics. In Shahnameh, other devices of emphasis are usually along with hyperboles. The second type of emphasis is the specific emphasis which happens through using nouns, inclusion, connecting pronouns, verbs, propounding the verb, prosody, sentence emphasis, sounds, rhetorical questions,  interjections, redundancy,  condition, omitting connectors, emphasis without devices, as well as emphasis through analogy and irony. Also, a transition of the sentence constituents can affect emphasis. The noun emphasis in Shahnameh happens through appositive pronoun, and the inclusion emphasis happens through words such as 'purity', 'thoroughly', 'all', 'anybody', 'anything', 'every', and 'everyone'. The exemplar connectors, in Shahnameh, are only 'particular' and 'in particular'. The techniques of pronoun emphasis are similar to those of noun emphasis. The verb emphasis happens through the verbs with the comparative and superlative adjectives, adverbs, and swears. Moreover, propounding the verb is one of the main techniques of emphasis in Shahnameh. The prosodic emphasis in Shahnameh mostly occurs with the word 'remorse'. Adverbs such as 'correctly' and 'inevitably' are used for the sentence emphasis, and 'never' and 'no' for emphasizing verbs such as 'prohibit' and 'forbid'. Redundancy is also another technique that occurs in Shahnameh based  to show emphasis.

In this descriptive-analytical method, this paper attempts to introduce the methods and functions of expressive emphasis in the discourse of Hafez's Ghazalat. Emphasis is one of the mechanisms of language that is created in different ways and in different ways and has various rhetorical functions. Emphasizing the emphasis on the meaning of the text helps to better translate the thoughts and thoughts of the speaker. Emphasis is considered as one of the language mechanisms in the context of the "contingent role" and "emotional role" of the language. These roles, respectively, are "audience-focused" and "speaker-oriented" roles that seek to convey thoughts in the text to the audience and express the feelings of the speaker. Each language user uses specific methods to sharpen their words based on the idea and purpose of expressing a subject. Semantic spheres emphasized in the textual context of Hafez Ghazalat are limited to the three strands of "God, Man and Love," but unlike the limitations of these spheres, methods and expressions of emphasis in these poems are diverse and varied. Among these methods, types of repetitions, various methods of confinement and palace, the use of emphasis constraints, quandary and question sentences, imperfect verbs, high degree of certainty, pseudo-immemorial, action verbs, facial verbs, calligraphy, displacement Significant syntactic components of sentences, sentences and delayed vocabulary are more frequent than other methods. The findings of the research show that Hafez used the emphasis in two direct ways "addressed to a particular audience" and indirectly "without considering a particular audience"...

Introduction In Persian, there are two basic processes to convey the syntactic structure of discourse according to the applied situation and the appropriateness of the addressee: the process of moving components and the process of transformation in structure and form. "Inclusivity" is one of the concepts that by using the process of change in structure and form, the preliminary and simple expression of discourse is converted to emphatic construction. Normal and simple expression of "inclusivity" is or it may be accompanied by signs such as "any" and "all". This simple form is created in situations where it is necessary to emphasize the subject and to make it understandable for audience, with syntactic mechanisms, modifying the basic and simple structure of the sentence that results in another syntactic structure expressing the intended opinion with emphasis. Review of Literature Change in the structure of a discourse is one of the syntactic capacities in Persian that is used for rhetoric purposes. Sometimes the difference between two sentences that express the same concept is not due to the displacement of the components and the lexical arrangement. It is caused by changes in the type and form of the components, such as the affirmation or negation, change in the form and time of the verbs, and in the type of sentences. By moving the components of the word, only different forms of a syntactic structure are obtained, in which the lexical arrangement is different, but the purpose of changing the syntactic structure is to change the nature of the structures without altering the conveyed meaning. Therefore, change in the type and form of the components is thus considered as one of the syntactic capacities of the Persian language in rhetoric. The subject of this research is in the field of syntactic rhetoric and there are many articles and books written in the field, all of which somehow go back to the "theory of semantic knowledge" of Jorjani, known as "syntactic theory (Elm-olMa’ani)", in other words, "the poet's and literary awareness of the syntactic uses of language and the role of each structure in any case" (ShafieiKadkani, 1997, p. 31). Therefore, what is directly related to this research, and the research literature on this subject needs to be pointed out is merely the work on the concept of inclusivity and the process of 'change in structure and form'. In this regard only in the book "an introduction to Persian rhetoric based on Sa’di's speech" on the one hand, there is a brief discussion on "change in form" as one of the contexts of rhetoric in Persian (Mohammadi, 1977, p. 31) and on the other hand, in one discourse, the syntactic structure of articulation has been examined, where both its metaphors are limited and some of its main points have been ignored (ibid., pp. 185-188). Of course, in the third volume of the book "History of Persian Language", Khanleri also mentions sentences made with the semiotic signs of "every" and "everybody" (Nathal-Khanleri, 1987: Vol. 3, pp. 426-436), with the exception that he did not discuss the topic by way of inclusivity and addressed it only from a grammatical point of view. Except for these two cases, no other material has been written on sentences with the meaning of inclusivity. Much research has also been done in relation to the emphasis, which is implicit in the present subject, such as Khosrow Farshidar's articles which have examined the emphasis and curtailing in the Persian language in detail which were published in several editions. His work focuses more on the use of methods such as synonyms, partial repetition of the word for emphasis, the use of accentual terms, and the use of adjectives (Farshidvard, 1975, p. 387). None of the work on the emphasis has been made on the capacity for change in the form and structure of a sentence. Method This article analyzes literary works by citing examples of nature and the underlying structural status of inclusivity. To do this, we examine the concept of inclusivity through a practical approach concerning the change in the syntactic structure of rhetorical expressions to explain the process of converting the simple expression of this concept into an emphatic structure. Results and Discussion The linguistic sign in the basic and ordinary form of expression is that the sentence is accompanied by, or may be accompanied by "any" or "all". In addition to the linguistic sign, there is also a semantic sign, such that the sentence is semantically embodied in a general sentence or in a pervasive concept. The following table illustrates the status of a simple sentence for the notion of inclusivity in both normal and accentual modes to reflect its changes during the transformation of ordinary structure into an emphatic one:  Ordinary form of inclusivity Emphatic form of inclusivity A sentence with an affirmative verb A sentence with a negative verb A sentence with a negative Verb = Negative Inclusivity = Global Negative Note: The attributive verb added to the emphatic structure is always negative   The state of the verbs in the compound sentences of the notion of ordinary and emphatic expression is also shown in the following table:  Ordinary form of inclusivity Emphatic form of inclusivity Follower sentence = positive + Base sentence = positive A) No use of negative attribution: Both negative sentences   B) Use of the negative attribute verb: follower sentence = positive; base sentence= negative Follower sentence = negative + base sentence = negative   A) No use of negative attribute verb: follower sentence= negative; base sentence = positive (unusual and impractical form)   B) Use of the negative attribute verb: follower sentence= negative; base sentence= positive (common and applicable) Follower sentence = negative Base sentence = positive   A) No use of negative attribution: Both negative sentences   B) Use of negative attribute verb: Both negative sentences Follower sentence = positive + base sentence = negative   A) Non-use of negative attribute verb: follower sentence = negative; base sentence= positive   B) Use of negative attribution verb: Both positive sentences As a comparison, it should be noted that the use of negative attributive verbs in the emphatic structure is more applicable and appropriate than the one not used. Conclusion From this study, it can be seen that the change in form and structure is one of the syntactic-rhetorical capacities in Persian language through which rhetorical expressions are expressed. In this study, it is practically illustrated by examples of how a simple and ordinary expression of the concept of inclusivity becomes a subliminal structure, and with what syntactic mechanism. In situations where there is a strong construction of inclusive expression, the addressee is in a position to deny or doubt the subject of the speaker. In such a case, the purpose of the speaker is no longer the expression of the essence of the news, as in the original form, but the speaker uses this construction to prove the reality of the subject. From this perspective, it is suggested that other constructs and concepts, such as the concept of inclusivity discussed here, be explored to better illustrate the extent to which this linguistic capacity is applied. This will identify how the ordinary expression of concepts is and how the ordinary structure of the concepts is altered, as well as how the rhetorical function of each of the ordinary structures will be understood by the target audience.

In this paper, Turkish Dialect of Germi will be examined (in Moghan, Ardebil Province). It’s based on the framework of remarkable typologists named Comrie (1989) Greenberg (1974). The aim is to study and describe the typological properties in different syntactic phrases. Regarding the language varieties and corruption of many dialects and languages, it’s necessary to study them. I attempt to gather and look into them to determine how they arrange in a sentence. The goal is to know how they arrange in different phrases and finally recognize the word order in this language. The data analysis shows that in this language, the word order is SOV (subjectꆸ��窶); this is the unmarked and basic order of constituents. So the subject and the object are located before verb; preposition and adjective are located before noun like other SOV order. The word order changing can manifest the information, focused on the position of the sentence.

Language is the most important means of communication and link among human beings to express their concepts and is a symbolic system for communication. In order for the messages to be conveyed successfully between the interlocutors, it is sometimes necessary to be accompanied by certain signs so that the recipient of the message receives what was exactly meant by the addresser. This process in Arabic and Persian is known as “Emphasizing or the Emphasis”. This study, using an inductive-inferential research design within a linguistic approach, tried to investigate the functions of the emphatic devices as tools, function words and style in the contemporary Arabic language while finding their Persian equivalents. The findings revealed that the emphatic tools have lost their emphatic role in modern Arabic and are solely used for the sake of textual coherence; therefore, there is no equivalent for them in Persian. The emphatic role of some of these words such as “Ghad” have been fainted and just play a role in determining the type of the verb. Another group of them like “Emphatic N” is rarely used in modern texts. However, emphatic styles have still kept their emphatic role and their equivalents can be easily found in Persian.

Highlighting various topics and methods are put forth a word, one of the issues in grammar, linguistics and rhetoric is raised. One of the characteristics of Persian language is that all forms of the word be emphatic. During written books on grammar, usually refers in passing to methods that have been put forth for the kind words. Sometimes articles have been written in the papers, case study methods emphasize a swear word will be discussed. In the present study emphasize a kind word to a number of methods based on research that has already been mentioned in this regard.

Discourse markers are of the most important elements of the language system, especially the conversational and informal language. Today, the study of discourse markers is one of the newest and most important topics in linguistics. This is important because speeches which lack these linguistic units are incomprehensible, imperfect and not clear enough. These linguistic units perform different functions in a language system and "the emphatic function" is one of them. Speakers emphasize on a specific part or the whole of a discourse using these discourse markers. Of course, based on the fact that "emphasis" is a complex issue in the language system, different tools are used to express it. Discourse markers are one of these tools. In this research, the emphatic discourse markers are analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively based on the two-fold framework of Brinton (1996), according to functional approach, and in pragmatics sphere. For this purpose, a colloquial corpus has been selected, which consists of three telefilms such as "panj ta panj", "ye bilit šāns", and "amu jān hitler".

There are various emphatic devices in the holy Quran, like oath that used in various forms. "Lā ̕qsem-o" is the most controversial structure. Study of this structure as a syntactic- emphatic device in Quran translation reveals their unbalanced equivalents based on existing theories of translation science. Because of the position of this structure in source language, its assessment based on House Textual Theory can lead to their precise translation. The most likely chosen interpretional theories by most of translators are considering "Lā" as additional letter and "̕qsem-o" as oath or the whole of "Lā ̕qsem-o" structure as one of oath methods. In real the equivalents of most of translators is according to these interpretional theories. As general, despite lexical balance, the major imperfection and weakness of majority of translators equivalents with various interpretational attitude is unbalanced grammar translation of "Lā ̕qsem-o" i.e. not finding emphatic equivalent to "̕qsem-o" itself. Though felicitous miracle of the Quran, linguistics differentiates and the translator role, himself, have effective role about balanced or unbalanced translation of this structure, but based on linguistic position of this structure in source language, it is possible to translate this structure, equivalent by using House overt translation method and "I do swear by".

This paper analyzes verb-preposing in yes-no questions in Persian within the Minimalist framework (Chomsky, 1995, 2000a-b). Raghibdoust (1993), in line with Karimi (1989), considers these constructions as the result of the extraction of the subject to the post-verbal position. As opposed to Raghibdoust (1993), therefore, in this paper, we employ some pieces of evidence including the impetus for the movement of constituents in grammar, the distinguished nature of the fronted verb compared to other fronted elements in structures with multiple fronted constituents, and the impossibility of fronting the light verb alone in compound verbs, hence leaving the nonverbal element in situ, to show that verb-preposing in yes-no structures in Persian is to be analyzed as the result of fronting of the verb rather than the extraposition of the subject. Following that, evidence is provided against Karimi’s (1994) idea that the head of CP should be taken as the position for the moved verb. Instead, using some evidence, we argue that the head of the FocusP obtains a better landing site for the preposed verbal element. If this analysis is on the right track, we then propose that the [-Q] feature on the head of the CP as the Probe is matched through the Agree mechanism with the [] feature on the preposed verb as the Goal to get checked and valued, hence satisfying the yes-no question interpretation.