grammaticalization

The present study investigates and analyzes "Gramaticalization" and "metaphoric extension" in Sohrab Sepehri's poems from the perspective of cognitive linguistics. In the process of grammaticalization, words become grammatical elements so that the meaning and concept and sometimes even the pronunciation of the word will be a function of the changes in the morphological and syntactic functions of the word. One of the approaches of grammaticalization is metaphorical extension, which takes place in the two realms of "embodiment" and "semantic extension and transferring the concept from the domain of origin to destination in verbs".   Considering the metaphorical nature and "surrealistic poetics" of Sohrab Sepehri's poetry and the complete examination of examples of metaphorical extension in his poetry, analyzing how meaning is reproduced in the grammar of body parts, as well as the extension of meaning in the movement of verbs from concrete to abstract realms and We have analyzed the mappings between the two spheres of origin and destination, and according to the extensive visual possibilities of Sohrab's poetry, the results obtained in a descriptive-analytical manner are presented with reference to the complete examination of examples of order and extension in "Eight Books".

This paper aims to explain the grammaticalization of the "indefinite" marker from Old Persian to Middle Persian within the noun phrase. In Old Persian, for the first time, the indefinite marker emerged in Persian grammar through the reanalysis of the numeral ai̯va 'one' based on metonymic relations and then metaphorical expansion in the context of "there is only one 'X', this 'X' represents a human being". In Middle Persian, this "indefinite" marker is more grammaticalized and as a bound morpheme of "-ē" in the noun phrase serves the role of encoding the concept of "indefiniteness". In the present study, we explain the grammaticalization of this linguistic element according to the principles of grammaticalization presented by Heine and Kuteva (2007). In this regard, we will also explain the acquisition of new meanings of the indefinite marker over time, from Old Persian to Middle Persian, based on Heine's (1997) indefinite marker semantic continuum.

Modality is of fundamental importance in studying the structure of all languages worldwide. Providing a comprehensive definition of this notion is difficult. In general, modality expresses the speaker's point of view towards the statement in the sentence. In terms of semantics, the modality is considered in two general categories: epistemic and root modalities. Epistemic modality expresses the speaker's assessment of the probability or predictability of the action. This type of modality involves the possibility or necessity of the proposition based on the judgment, evidence, or knowledge of the speaker. Root modality is used to express concepts such as coercion, permission, and ability and is divided into two subsets: deontic and dynamic. In deontic modality, external circumstances and power often oblige the third person or addressee to act or do an activity. In dynamic modality, the inner force or the existing conditions provide the necessity or possibility for the action to be performed. This kind of modality expresses the ability and capability of the actor.

The present study, as a data-based and diachronic one, has been done in order to investigate different types of pragmatic meanings belonging to the discourse marker “ya’ni” on thetical grammar level, and development of these meanings over time (centuries 4 to 14 A.H.). This study is based on Traugott and Dasher’s view (2002) on “subjectification spectrum” (non- subjective > subjective > intersubjective meanings). To collect research data, two literary books from each century were chosen. Then, all the occurrences of “ya’ni” in those books were manually identified. Finally, they were analyzed based on the paper’s analytical framework. The research data show that the discourse marker “ya’ni” acquires new pragmatic meanings such as textual, subjective and intersubjective ones on thetical grammar level, and moves away from its propositional meaning. It indicates that after pragmaticalization and transferring to thetical grammar, this discourse marker acquires new meanings through grammaticalization. The more it moves away from its propositional meaning, the more it is grammaticalized. There is also an order in forming these meanings so that textual meanings are formed at first; then subjective and intersubjective meanings appear in this discourse marker respectively.

One of the internal factors of linɡuistic chanɡes is the ɡrammaticalization (also known as ɡrammaticization or ɡrammatization), a process by which a previously free and independent word ɡains a ɡrammatical function and status. Historical studies indicate that most auxiliaries in many lanɡuaɡes of the world, includinɡ New Persian, have already been lexical verbs, and their use in the role of auxiliary verbs is the result of auxiliation. This article shows on a parallel with what happened in the evolution of Middle Persian, that is, the lexical verb [xwāstan] ʻwantʼ becominɡ an auxiliary verb, was used to represent the concept of the future, in some Middle and New Iranian lanɡuaɡes, especially the Central Dialects of Iran, the denominative verb [kāmīdan] ʻwantʼ was ɡrammaticalized into a future tense marker. But with the fundamental difference that in these lanɡuaɡes the verb [kāmīdan] with the loss of its lexical use as independent verb, has become compeletely an auxiliary verb or particle

Dibaji dialect is one of the linguistic types along the Caspian Sea, which has a morphological and syntactic similarity with the Mazandaran language, which is one of the northwestern languages. Dibaji dialect is the language of the people of Dibaj, which is located between Semnan and Mazandaran provinces. In this research, by analyzing more than 140 verbs from the Dibaji dialect, we examine the prefix "/ba-/" and compare it with the standard Persian language. The method of this research is descriptive, analytical and comparative. To compare the grammaticalization procedure of the prefix "/ba-/" in both linguistic species, we have inevitably used ancient iranian language and the Middle and old periods sources and texts. In this research, we seek to discover the differences between this prefix in Dibaji and the standard Persian. To achieve this goal, we have categorized verbs with the prefix "/ba-/" in different verb paradigms. Then we have studied the role and function of this prefix in Dibaji verbs in comparison with Persian. The findings of this study show that the prefix "/ba-/" of Dibaji, like the Persian prefix "/ba-/", has undergone grammatical evolution;It means that this prefix has evolved from free polysyllabic morpheme in the role of adverbs to a dependent syllable, and in this path of change, it has been exposed to various grammaticalization mechanisms such as decategorization, desemanticization, phonological erosion, regidification and so on. Based on the evidences, we will compare the grammaticalization pattern of this prefix with Persian. We will also show that this prefix in Dibaji has not been eliminated by reaching the end line of the grammaticalization path, but by semantic fusion in the present simple form, it has figured out the phenomenon of lexicalization, which is a kind of degrammaticalization.

Modal verbs are a group of helping verbs that represent modal concepts in relation to the main verb and are the result of the occurrence of grammaticalization, the process by which the grammatical items are created. In this study we investigate the grammaticalization of modal verb vastǝn (have to) in Gilaki, one of the Iranian languages of the western branch. Gilaki is a language with poor historical data, so we use Hopper's principles of gammaticalization (1991) as the main framework of the research to identify cases of grammaticalization. We also use the concepts word order, reanalysis, analogy and desemanticization. We measure the effectiveness of these principles and in some cases we present an alternative analysis. In this paper after introducing the theoretical framework, we analyze the data. The results show that with regard to borrowing of modal element of obligation from Persian to Gilaki, two functional items including modal element of tendency and negation element are specific for Gilaki. Changing in the imperative mood system is the most important result that is obtained through grammaticalization of modal verb vastǝn which makes Gilaki different from other Iranian languages.

Introduction :

Diachronic approaches to the study of Persian language help us understand not only the historical features of this language, but also the characteristics of its modern usage. There are linguistic forms in New Persian derived from the verb “gereftan: to take” which play a modal role in sentences and indicate hypothetical actions and irrealis modality; in other words, they are used to help us express the modal concept of assumption and imagine unrealistic conditions. An example of such function can be seen in the following proverb: “giram pedar-e to bud fāzel / az fazl-e pedar to rā če hāsel?” “Let me suppose that your father was a wise man, / what does his wisdom to do with you?” i.e. “Never mind who your grandfather was, what are you?” The main purpose of this article is to answer the question of how the verb "gereftan: to take" has acquired such a modal usage. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to show the process in which the verb "gereftan: to take" gradually takes distance from its lexical meaning and gets closer to grammatical functions.

Methodology:

 In this article, after a review of the literature, we go through the theoretical framework of the study regarding grammaticalization and modality. Accordingly, grammaticalization is defined as a process of change in languages through which lexical forms containing independent semantic meanings gradually obtain grammatical functions, for example to represent modality, aspect, etc. The linguistic form subject to changes such as desemanticization and phonetic reduction may, depending on the context, play a double role for a long period of time both as lexical and grammatical element. On the other hand, in a specific language, there might be several approaches to indicate a single grammatical sense such as modality. As time goes by, one of these approaches can overcome the others for the sake of its higher frequency of use in different contexts. As a result of later changes, such linguistic form may be decategorized and function merely as a grammatical device. The whole process of grammaticalization is under the influence of reanalysis and analogy. Before jumping to discussion, it is necessary that we review the definition of modality too. According to Lyons (1977), modality refers to the speaker’s opinions and attitudes towards propositions expressed with language or circumstances. Concepts such as assertion, obligation, supposition, etc. are amongst modal situations. Every language has its own specific tools to represent modality including “lexical” ways or “grammatical / semi-grammatical” linguistic devices such as verbal mood, modal verbs, adverbs of modality and. In New Persian, modality is more expressed by modal verbs and adverbs than by the verb moods. Within this framework and through a diachronic approach, we will discuss the different functions of the verb “gereftan: to take” in Persian. More specifically, here, evidence extracted from texts written in Old Persian, Middle Persian and New Persian is analyzed to clarify the process of grammaticalization of the verb “gereftan: to take” and its modal functions in theses contexts.

Discussion :

The root “grab” in Old Persian texts, signifies “own something”, “seize something (as possession of / as prisoner)” (see Kent, 1953): 1) xšaçam hauv agarbāyatā: He seized the kingdom. (DB I, 41-42) 2) …avam Vahyazdātam agarbāya…: That Vahyazdata they took prisoner. (DB III, 47-48) Later usages of the verb “gereftan: to understand” is not attested in Old Persian but can be traced back to Avestan texts (see Bartholomae, 1961): 3) hiiat̰ ϑβā hə̄m caṣ̌mainī hə̄ṇgrabəm: When I grasp you with my eyes. (Yasna 31.8, Humbach et al., 1991) Also, the root “grabh” in Sanskrit is used to signify “to understand”, “to learn”, “to calculate”, etc. (see Monier- Williams, 1899). In Middle Persian Zand texts, influenced by translation from Avestan, the verb “grift- / gīr-” is used to mean “perceive through the senses” (Changizi, 2016). More specifically, the formula “pad… grift- / gīr-” is frequently used in Middle Persian texts signifying “to consider”, “to suppose” and “to learn”: 4) mēnōg ī xrad pad puštībānīh gīrēnd…: When they consider / choose the spirit of wisdom as (their) guardian. (Anklesaria, 1913) 5) “wāzag [ō] awe gōwišn ke wīr a’ōn ku frāz gīrēd.” “It is necessary to say the word to a person who has such comprehension that he grasps it.” (Dēnkart vi, Shaked, 1979) In New Persian, “gereftan” is used to construct some compound verbs such as “yād gereftan: to learn”, “pand gereftan: take advice”, “ebrat gereftan: to learn a lesson”, etc. In some contexts, the noun phrase object is replaced by a subordinate clause. Such changes pave the way for the verb “gereftan” in New Persian, to be topicalized, desemanticized and finally distanced from its lexical meaning. As a result, some forms of the verb “gereftan” go further in the path of grammaticalization to express modal concept of hypothetical actions and irrealis modality. The forms attested in the texts and also in colloquial and everyday language are restricted to the singular imperative ({be}-gir) (6), plural imperative (be-gir-id), in subjunctive mood, in present tense, first-person singular (gir-am) (7) and first-person plural (gir-im) (8), and first-person singular verb conjugated in past tense (gereft-am) (9). 6) “gir ke giti hame čang ast-o nāy …”: “let’s say the whole world is {full of the sound of} harp and ney …” (A poem by Anvari) 7) “giram ke dar bāvar-e-tān be xāk nešaste-am / va sāqehā-e javānam az zarbehā-e tabarhā-tān zaxmdār ast / bā riše če mi-kon-id?” “let’s say in your assumption I got broken down and defeated / and my young stalks are wounded by the blows of your axes / what are you going to do with roots?” (A Poem by Dadvar, 1990) 8) “towbe gir-im ke bāz ast dar-aš sud-aš čist?” “Let’s say the gate of repentance is open, what is the point?” (Unpublished poem by H. Zahmatkesh) 9) “gereft-am ze to nātavān-tar basi-st / tavānā-tar az to ham āxer kasi-st.” “let’s say there are many more feeble than you; Than you, at least One is more puissant, too.” (A poem by Sa’di) The whole construction can be formulized az “giram / girim / gereftam / gir (that) X, then Y” in which, X is the sentence expressing the hypothetical situation and Y is the one expressing its would-be result. 

Conclusion:

 In this paper, different functions of the verb “gereftan: to take” in Persian were discussed. After reviewing the literature and theoretical framework of the study, evidence extracted from texts written in Old Persian, Middle Persian and New Persian was analyzed to clarify the process of grammaticalization of the verb “gereftan: to take” and its modal functions in these contexts. The results suggest that following a metaphorical extension, in specific contexts, the verb shifted to the beginning of the clause so that the noun phrase object was replaced by a subordinate clause. Thereby, due to mechanisms such as reanalysis and analogy, the first-person singular verb in past tense (gereft-am), first person singular and plural verb in present tense (gir-am, gir-im) and the imperative form of the verb ({be}gir) have gradually lost their lexical characteristics and gone further in the path of grammaticalization to indicate hypothetical actions and irrealis modality.

The aim of the present study is to examine the historical evolution of the prefixal verbs in Dibaji dialect. One of the important factors in the evolution process of languages is grammaticalization, in which lexical categories become grammatical morphemes or grammatical categories become more restricted than before. The reverse process is called degrammaticalization.In the present article, we intend to examine the evolution of prefixal verbs in Dibaji dialect and find the answer to the question whether grammaticalization occurred during the change of the prefixal verbs of this dialect or these verbs were degrammaticalized. In order to answer this question, we examine the evolution of verbal prefixes and the formation of these prefixal verbs over time. Studying the ancient texts of Iranian languages, we indicate that the prefixes of these verbs were lexical items in the ancient period, which were decategorized and evolved into current forms by acquiring a grammatical role and changing into affixes. Then, we indicate that the degrammaticalization process has occurred by attaching verbal prefixes to simple verbs and the formation of prefixal verbs.In this research, more than 300 prefixal verbs were collected and analyzed in a descriptive, analytical and comparative way.

Based upon diachronic-cognitive linguists, language structure is the product of our interaction with the world around us. The way we build discourse and develop linguistic categories can immediately be derived from the way we experience our environment and use that experience in specific communication. Thanks to recent works on the evolution of grammatical categories e.g auxiliaries, we now have a sizable knowledge of the main patterns of grammaticalization which allows for fairly reliable linguistic reconstructions and hypotheses on genetic evolution through main cognitive processes e.g semantic bleeching. Following the doctorines of cognitive semantics, the present proposal bears an attempt to discover and define which aspects of meaning of a lexical source are lost and which are preserved through grammaticalization. Analyzing a specific grammaticalized product, namely the auxiliary verb xâstan, the future marker, through the lexical xâstan ‘to want’ in Persian, we will suggest that the evolution of the target grammatical meaning, the future, through grammaticalization process occurs applying semantic bleaching by way of which the entire idiosyncratic semantic features are vanished but the image-schematic structure. This must mean that an image-schema is abstracted from the earlier lexical sense since it would be potentially much more immanent and pervasive than the fully fleshed-out lexical meaning.

In Gilaki, four forms are used to express permission: vâhâštǝn, bedâ, benǝ and tânǝstǝn. Some of these forms indicate the issuance of permission and some indicate the request for permission. These forms are the result of the grammaticalization of the forms that had lexical functions in the old periods of Iranian languages. In this article, the process of grammaticalization of the grams which represent permission has been investigated based on the data from Avestan, Old Persian, Middle Persian, and Persian literary texts. In most languages, permission is represented either through the grammaticalization of verbs that imply abandoning and leaving or through the grammaticalization of verbs that imply the concept of ability and are also used to express probability. In the Gilaki, the forms vâhâštǝn and bedâ, from the root harz / hard, which means "to leave", survived in the old period of Iranian languages. Benǝ, from the infinitive nehan, in addition to the lexical meaning of "putting", was used in a stage of language evolution to express the meaning of "leaving" and then its imperative verb was grammaticalized to express the concept of permission. Tânǝstǝn is also from the root tav meaning "to be able" in the old period of Iranian languages. This form in the course of evolution, in addition to the modal concept of ability, is also used to express possibility and permission.

Discourse marker is a functional-pragmatic category, not affecting truth conditions of the sentence. These linguistic elements encode procedural rather than representative or propositional meanings. Discourse markers have been the subject of increasing attention in recent years, and have been investigated in different theoretical frameworks. Among the vast variety of approaches toward interpreting the role of discourse markers, one major approach is rooted in Grice's suggestion. By elaborating the concept of conventional implicature along the previously well-known concept of conversational implicature, Grice (1989) treats some discourse markers as being instances of the former. He also conceptualized the concept of non-central or higher-level speech acts to account for the contribution of these discourse markers to the meaning of their host sentence. In this article, we will initially describe the characteristics of the discourse marker "magar" (‘unless’/’but’) in terms of prototypical characteristics of discourse markers proposed by Brinton (1996) and Heine (2013). We then present a diachronic exposition of its semantic development from having a propositional meaning to a word with a textual and expressive function in contemporary Persian. This explanation is in accordance with Traugott’s (1986) analysis of semantic change toward more subjectification. Ultimately, we have applied a Gricean interpretation to this Persian discourse marker, as a higher-level speech act. It is argued that "magar" (‘unless’/’but), in addition to its function as a connective element (which connects two textual units or encrypts the connection between the propositional content of an utterance and its previous context), can help with the performance of a non-central speech act with the illocutionary force of indicating opposition. Given the fact that speech acts, in Searl's terms, are the subject of the quadruple felicity conditions, namely Preparatory, Sincerity, Propositional content and Essential conditions we have shown how these conditions can be actualized (or applied) when it comes to higher-level speech acts.

Three types of meaning i.e., propositional (conceptual), textual and interpersonal were acknowledged for language in the tradition of functional studies. In light of such appraoch, this study aims 1) to describe different types of meanings of in (this) and ân (that) in Persian and, 2) to show that how basics of grammaticalization can be applied to provide a synchronic survey of the semantic variety of the aforementioned dectic expressions as discourse markers in Persian. Based on Traugott & Dasher (2002), this paper examines the different uses of these elements by looking at their propositional (conceptual), textual and interpersonal meanings. The analysis indicates that in & ân are used in their propostional meaning and also used in the bridging contexts. Moreover, the investigation shows unlike ân, the semantic changes of in extends beyond the bridging contexts. So in (this) as a discourse marker, textually has a function in changing the topical trends and creating a pause to formulate the upcoming discourse. It is subjectively used to designate and emphasize the upcoming discourse and to create a contrast and inter-subjectively functions in speech acts such as requesting, asking and advising. Grammaticalization of the deictic expressions supports Traugott & Dasherchr('39')s clines. However, Traugott & Dasherchr('39')s semantic cline, should be modified in way of impersonal subjective > personal subjective > inter-subjective. In sum, using a descriptive-analytical methodology, it indicated that these elements have different uses which grammaticalization (Traugott and Dashar, 2002) provides a solid theoretical framework to describe and study these expressions in Persian.

This article is concerned with the emergence of the verb “pendâštan” and its modal roles in Persian language. Here, the focus is on two linguistic processes, lexicalization and grammaticalization, to analyze data extracted from texts written in Old Persian, Middle Persian, and New Persian and to study changes the verb “pendâštan” has gone through in the history of Persian language. The main purpose of this article is to find the origin and function of the two forms “pendâšti” and “pendâri” both used in New Persian to indicate modality: the speaker’s attitude toward the sentence. In order to achieve this goal, we should study how these two forms function in post-Islamic Persian texts and trace the influence of Middle Persian optative construction on New Persian language. Evidence extracted from Old, Middle and New Persian texts, indicate that the Middle Persian formula “pad ēd dāšt-/ dār-”, gone through phonological reduction and three stages of lexicalization, entered New Persian lexicon in the form of “pendâšt-/ pendâr-”. In Dari Persian, “pendâštan” was known as a lexical main verb containing conceptual content while on the other hand, having lost its verbal features, was reanalyzed as a grammatical device to represent irrealis modality.

Language structure is the product of our interaction with the world around us. The way we build discourses and develop linguistic categories can be derived from the way we experience our environment. Language encodes some points of spatial orientations which are abstract concepts such as “up”, “down”, “front”, “back” and the like by means of concrete domains e.g. “body-parts”, “landmarks”, and “verbs”. In this research, the process of changing these objective sources into spatial orientation is called “directionization”. The present study investigates directionization in Persian based on Heine's (1997) approach, and Davari and Naghzguy- Kohan's (2017a, b) model which is used to determine the dimensions of directionization, or the extent of  semantic, morpho-syntactic and phonetic changes of the sources. The data were gathered from poetry and prose books, proverbs, novels, dictionaries, elementary and high school Persian textbooks, websites, and daily and television conversations. Time span includes Early New Persian (4th-13th century) and New Persian (13th  century- today). Data analysis indicates that Persian uses body-parts such as head, foot, eye, heart and the like for expressing relative and metaphorical directions. Through this process, mentioned lexical sources have undergone the second degree of grammaticalization.

The article tries to make a link between grammatical function of the prefix be- with past verbs in the current atlas of New West Iranian and the historical atlas of New Persian, and to interpret this marker’s historical statistics with respect to its behavior in today’s Iranian varieties. In the historical sampling of this research, 22% of past verbs of simple morphological structure (non-prefixed and non-complex) in 4th to 7th centuries had the prefix be-, but in the following centuries, its frequency decreased gradually, and eventually it disappeared. On the other hand, in the contemporary century, a very high level of grammaticalization of be- in the same position is observed in a wide variety of Iranian languages and dialects. The author looks at these two phenomena (the historical behavior of be- and its today’s behavior) in the same line, and believes that there has been a single path of grammaticalization of be- in progress in New West Iranian languages, but the written/standard variety of New Persian stopped this process for some external or internal reasons (contact with varieties without be-, and development of mi- as imperfective marker, respectively), while the process continued in some Iranian varieties to the current level.

This paper attempts to make a link between the grammatical function of the prefix be- with past tense verbs in the current atlas of New West Iranian and the historical atlas of New Persian, and to interpret the marker’s statistical behavior in old texts with respect to its behavior in today’s Iranian varieties. The issue of the grammatical function of be- in this position has always been controversial, and grammarians and linguists have proposed functions such as decorative, redundant, emphatic, and perfective aspect for it. With a statistical approach, this research is concerned with this controversial issue, considering the status of perfective aspect marker in the current linguistic atlas (of West Iranian varieties), suggesting the hypothesis that the grammaticalization of be- as the perfective aspect marker had begun in some regions in the historical linguistic atlas.

A common phenomenon in grammars is the grammaticalization of the speaker’s viewpoint towards the event: seeing it as a whole completed event, or looking from inside as an uncompleted one. This opposition, called perfective and imperfective aspect, respectively, is the main distinction in the grammatical aspect domain. In simpler words, the grammatical category of aspect is the result of grammaticalization of the speaker’s viewpoint. In this domain, there may be a grammaticalized morpheme for each opposition (perfective and imperfective); or just marking one the oppositions overtly, with no marker for the other one.   

The historical corpus of this research includes 77 thousand verbs, extracted from 55 texts from 10th to 20th centuries. To this aim, five texts from each century were selected, and then, two pieces of each text were taken randomly as the sampled data, each one including 700 verbs (1400 verbs from each text, altogether).

According to the statistics, be- in the grammatical function under discussion generally appears with positive verbs of simple structure (non-prefixed and non-complex), and its highest rate of usage is in 10th and 11th centuries. In these two centuries, on average, out of every four simple verbs in perfective aspect, one verb (and a bit more) takes be- (26.7%). In 12th and 13th centuries, the frequency of be- shows decrease (19%), and then, in the 14th, the statistics is reduced to less than half (8.1%), gradually disappearing in the following centuries. Furthermore, in 10th to 13th centuries, there are 17 texts from various geographical regions, having a rate higher than 10%, which shows that be- was being used in all centers of text production in the cultural territory of Persian. Also, the number of verbs with be- in the whole period (142 verbs, non-repeatedly) shows its high productivity, hence its inflectional nature, rejecting the derivational function hypothesis. On the other side, according to several researches in dialectology, a very high level of grammaticalization of be- in the same position has been reported in a wide range of Iranian varieties. At least in Mazandarani, Gilaki, Tati, Khorasani, Central Iranian, and Talishi, there are several language varieties with this marker in the same position, and in many of them, be- is nearly fully-productive with simple verbs. Furthermore, complex predicates and some past forms (present perfect, past perfect, and past subjunctive) are used with be- in some Iranian varieties. If we suppose that in early centuries the grammaticalization process of be- was in progress in some regions of the geography of Iranian languages, then, it may be hypothesized that since 14th century the production of Persian texts and the standardization of written language was affected by the varieties which lacked this function of be-, and this function was stopped gradually, but the varieties which had the marker (previously having more influence on the production of Persian texts) continued grammaticalizing itto the current level. By contrast, if we suppose that the grammaticalization of be- was only going on in New Persian, and after being stopped, it started again in some regions of the geography of Iranian languages, then, firstly, it would be difficult to account for the relatively short time spent for such a high level of grammaticalization of be- in today’s varieties, and secondly, on this assumption, the connection between perfective function and subjunctive-imperative function would be broken off, and restarting grammaticalization for perfective aspect would require theoretical justification. The author believes that it is more plausible to consider the grammaticalization of be- in the grammars of West Iranian languages as a single phenomenon. In other words, there has been a single path of grammaticalization of be- (for perfective aspect) in progress in New West Iranian languages which was gradually stopped in New Persian since 14th century, and was continued in some Iranian varieties. The consequence of such an integrated approach to the phenomenon will be that we can also consider be- in Classical Persian as a perfective marker.   

The statistics of this research show that 22% of simple perfective verbs in 10th to 13th centuries had be-. On the other hand, now, a very high level of grammaticalization of be- in the same position is observed in a wide range of Iranian varieties. The author believes that the most plausible explanation for these two linguistic phenomena (historical behavior of be- and its today’s behavior) is that the grammaticalization of be- for perfective aspect marking began since Early New Persian period (or possibly even Middle period), but Persian stopped this process gradually for some external reasons (contact with varieties without be-) or internal reasons (establishment of mi- as imperfective marker), while the process continued in some Iranian varieties to the current level.   

Syntactic and semantic analysis of modal verbs, particularly “bāyestan”, has been a challenging topic in Persian language studies due to its special inflectional, syntactic, and semantic states. These studies are mainly focused on the uses of this verb in contemporary Persian, ignoring the historical texts. The current study, relying on data derived from Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī (1,114 cases), aims to review the challenging semantic and syntactic aspects of this verb. First, by referring to some of the morphosyntactic features of this verb, we have identified its status in terms of tense, time implications, and differentiation between different forms of past and present tenses. Next, we have shown that in the valency of this verb there is either a noun phrase (subject) or a complement clause. Subsequently, we have introduced and discussed two assumptions about the verb bāyestan: either considering the complement clause as the subject and the expletive pro. We have thus shown that the impersonality of this verb is due to the syntactic and semantic nature of the subject and has nothing to do with the changes of the verb during the grammaticalization. Afterward, it was found that non-finite clauses have no syntactic subject, and what has been suggested in some research as the 'subject' of “Ra” is in fact a noun phrase whose syntactic role is the optional complement of the verb bāyestan and its semantic role is the beneficiary. This noun phrase is essentially independent of the complement clause. In this regard, it was found that unlike Davari's analysis (1394), modality in non-finite clauses may also be agent-oriented, and at least based on Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī data, it is not possible to consider moving from action-oriented modality to agent-oriented modality as a grammaticalization process. Finally, the semantic examination of the verb bāyestan supported the previous analyses in this field and revealed that all uses of the verb in the Tārīkh-i Bayhaqī are non-epistemic modality.

This paper is concerned with a formal representation of auxiliation in four auxiliary constructions in Persian. These include the modal ‘bayæd’ construction, the futurate ‘xastæn’ construction, the aspectual ‘daštæn’ construction, and the modal ‘tævanestæn’ construction. Coached within a Role and Reference Grammar framework, the study explores the degree of grammaticalization in each construction utilizing three parameters of person/number inflection, tense-sensitivity, and contiguity. Each construction reacts differently with respect to these parameters to the extent that the auxiliary verb in the relevant construction receives a distinctive syntactic treatment in the layered structure of the clause. ‘bayæd’ is taken to be a fully developed operator exclusively projected in the operator projection. ‘xastæn’, together with the lexical of head, forms a complex nucleus demonstrating tense-inflection as well in the operator projection. ‘daštæn’, constituting a non-predicating nucleus, stands in an ad-nuclear subordinate relation to the lexical head in the progressive construction. ‘tævanestæn’ is the only modal verb within this quadripartite division that fails to constitute an auxiliary construction, due to the fact that it predicates a separate argument structure of its own in the spirit of the least amount of semantic bleaching. These all attest to the fact that the syntactic projection of each auxiliary verb in the layered structure of the clause is a reflection of the degree of grammaticalization in the relevant auxiliary construction.

One of the most puzzling facts about human language is also one of the most basic: Words occur according to a famously systematic frequency distribution such that there are few very high-frequency words that account for most of the tokens in text and many low-frequency words. In his pioneering research, G. K. Zipf observed that more frequent words tend to have more meanings, and showed that the number of meanings of a word grows as the square root of its frequency. One aspect that all dynamical models of grammar emphasize is that frequency of occurrence is an important determinant of linguistic structure and language use. This paper surveys the effects of frequency on Aspects in Persian and considers the correlation between Frequency and the numbers of different types of Aspect member in Persian. Aspect is a grammatical category that expresses how an action, event, or state, denoted by a verb, extends over time. Based on Bybee (1985, 1995, 201, 2003, 2006, 2011) and Haspelmath (2002, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2014) and Croft (2003), we try to clarify the frequency effect in decreasing numbers of different types of aspects in Persian. frequency-based form minimization, is probably the most important economy effect that shapes grammatical systems. Since Greenberg(1966a) and Croft (1990), this economy effect has been widely known, and has often been discussed under the heading of markedness. We conclude that There is a Reverse Relationship between the number of different types of aspect members and the frequency.

In the Persian literary texts, the verb hesht and its present stem hel- have been used with mood's lexical meanings and grammatical function. On the other hand, the past stem of the verb is used in the form helid that is analogical formation. In this article, the root of the verb in the old period of Iranian languages; its main meaning, and other lexical meanings in three periods of Persian language has been examined and the process of semantic evolution and its change to grammatical form for representing modal concept has been described. Hištan is derived from root harz in Avestan Language to meaning “to abandon”, “to leave” and in Middle Persian and Persian literary texts besides "abandoning" mean, is used to mean "putting", "assigning", and "appointing" and also. Moreover, it has become a tool to express the permission modality in Middle Persian. In the Persian literary texts, gozāshtan has also represented the modal concept of permission. Gradually, the use of gozāshtan for denoting this concept has become dominant, and heštan has become eliminated.