بررسی ساخت‌های همپایه‌ انفصالی در زبان فارسی

نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری زبانشناسی، گروه زبان و زبانشناسی، واحد زنجان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران

2 استادیار زبانشناسی، گروه زبان و زبانشناسی، واحد زنجان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان،

3 استادیار رشته آموزش زبان انگلیسی، گروه زبان و زبانشناسی، واحد زنجان، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، زنجان، ایران

چکیده
هدف این مقاله این است تا امکانات زبان فارسی برای بیان ساخت‌‌های همپایه انفصالی را مورد بررسی قرار دهد. زبان فارسی، اغلب از همپایه‌سازها برای نشان دادن همپایگی انفصالی استفاده می کند. در صورت استفاده از همپایه‌ساز، زبان فارسی از سه نوع آن بهره می‌برد که عبارتند از: بسیط، مرکب و گسسته(دوتایی). هدف ما در پژوهش حاضر مشخص ساختن همپایه‌سازهای انفصالی فارسی، تعیین جایگاه آنها و بررسی حساسیت همپایه‌سازهای انفصالی فارسی به مقوله پایه‌ها می‌باشد. داده‌های این پژوهش مشتمل بر 44 جمله است که از گویشوران بومی و یا موتور جستجوگر گوگل جمع‌آوری شده‌اند. در بین این همپایه‌سازها تعدادی می‌توانند علاوه بر بیان همپایگی انفصالی، دیگر انواع همپایگی را نیز بیان کنند که رایج‌ترین آن «و» می باشد که به صورت هم‌زمان به عنوان همپایه‌سازهای عطفی، تقابلی، علّی و انفصالی می‌تواند بکار رود. در این زبان علاوه بر «یا» از کلمات پرسشی، قیدهای مربوط به تردید و شک و همچنین منابع فعلی نیز می‌توان به عنوان همپایه‌ساز انفصالی استفاده کرد که اکثریت آنها همپایه‌سازهای بومی زبان فارسی می باشند و از دیگر زبان های قرض گرفته نشده‌اند. به لحاظ جایگاه ‌همپایه‌سازهای انفصالی زبان فارسی به صورت های زیر بکار می‌روند: [co- A][B]) و [A][B-co]).

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

The Study of Disjuctive Coordination in Persian Language

نویسندگان English

Jalal Ahmadkhani 1
Mohammad Reza Oroji 2
Sakineh Jafari 3
1 PhD candidate, Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran (Corresponding Author)
3 Assistant Professor, Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran
چکیده English

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine the possibilities of the Persian language to express disjunctive constructions according to Haspelmath (2004&2007). Although juxtaposition is a dominant way of expressing coordination, Persian language often uses coordinators to show disjunctive coordination. Generally, when there is no emphasis on the disjunctive coordinator or the type of connection between two coordinands can be interpreted by referring to the context, juxtaposition is used, which is not a dominant phenomenon to express the disjunctive coordination in Persian language. In case of using coordinators, Persian language uses three types of it, which are: simple, compound and discrete (binary). Our aim in the present study is to identify Persian disjunctive coordinators, determine their position, and investigate the sensitivity of Persian disjunctive coordinators to the category of coordinands. The data of this research consists of 48 sentences which were collected from native speakers. The findings of the research indicate that: the majority of disjunctive coordinators of Persian language are not sensitive to the category of coordinands and can be used with all kinds of phrases and clauses. Among these coordinators, some of them can express other types of coordinations in addition to disjunctive coordination, the most common of which are "va" and "o" which can be used as conjunctive, contrastive, causative and disjunctive coordinations at the same time. In this language, in addition to "or", interrogative words, adverbs related to doubt and uncertainty, as well as verb sources can also be used as disjunctive coordinators, most of which are native coordinators of the Persian language and are not borrowed from other languages. In terms of position, the disjunctive coordinators of the Persian language are used in the following ways: [A][B] , [A][co-B] , [co-A][co-B].
Key words: coordinands, coordination, disjunctive coordination, Persian language

Introduction
There are two ways to connect two or more units, which are "coordination" and "suboordination". Haspelmath (2004&2007) states that "coordination is a syntactic structure in which two or more identical units are merged into a larger unit. While, despite the integration, as before, they have the same meaningful relationships with the elements around them". Four types of coordination constructions can be distinguished. These four types of constructions are: conjunctive, adversative, disjunctive, and causative constructions.
Disjunctive conjunction is related to a field in which an action has not happened or the speaker is not sure of doing it. The purpose of this study is to investigate disjunctive coordination in Persian.
Materials & methods
The method of conducting this research is descriptive qualitative. At first, we collected the equivalent constructions in the mentioned language ​​by the native speakers ​​and analyzed them. For this purpose, we asked native speakers to talk about memories or topics, and by recording their conversations and then writing them down, we extracted the required structures. To examine the possibilities of the Persian language to express disjunctive constructions, we have used Haspelmath (2004&2007).
Discussion & Result
Four types of coordinate construction can be distinguished. These four types of constructions are: conjunctive, adversative, disjunctive, and causative constructions. Disjunctive coordination includes events that cannot happen together and is related to a field in which an action has not happened or the speaker is not sure of doing it. Disjunctive coordinations are not as common as conjunctive coordinations.. In a written text, conjunctive coordinations have a higher frequency of occurrence than disjunctive coordinations. A disjunctive structure can express two equal possibilities without any kind of choice.
Disjunctive coordinations in Persian language are divided into three categories; They are: simple, compound and discrete (binary). Persian disjunctive coordinators are formed from adverbs, verbs, and interrogative words. Both in simple and compound coordinators, if it is shifted, the sentence looks more acceptable. The phenomenon of ellipsis of repeated elements or elements that can be interpreted with respect to the first coordinand is also common in disjunctive constructions and this removal is progressive.
Conclusion
In creating a disjunctive relationship between two or more bases in the Persian language, both juxtaposition and coordinators are used. The most widely used disjunctive coordinator of the Persian language is "ja:", which is not sensitive to the category and is used with all phrases and clauses. Discrete coordinators are either repeating "or" or are not repeating "or" and all follow the pattern [co-A][co-B]. In addition, none of them are sensitive to the category. In addition to "ja: ... ja:", the Persian language also uses from the verb source (xa:h .... xa:h), introgative words ( tʃe .... tʃe) and adverbs related to doubt and possibility (ʃa:jad …. ʃa:jad ) as discrete disjunctive coordinators.
There is another type of disjunctive conjunction in Persian language, which is also called temporal alternation. This bisyndetic coordination, which is shown by "ga:h …. ga:h" is actually similar to disjunctive conjunction and shows events that happen alternately at different times. In fact, "ga:h.... ga:h" refers to a kind of temporal relationship that indicates transformation, in which the first "ga:h" indicates a state and quality, and the second "ga:h" indicates a change in that state or quality.
The simple coordinators "va" and "-o" can also be used as disjunctive coordinators in Persian language. All disjunctive coordinators in Persian, including simple, compound and discrete, can be accompanied by conjunctive coordinators "va" and "-o". In addition to "va" and "-o", the simple disjunctive coordinator "ja:" and all discrete coordinators of the Persian language can be combined with "ham".
In terms of the position of coordinators, in the construction of coordinators from the four logical positions proposed by Haspelmeth (2004 and 2007), the following three positions can be imagined for disjunctive coordinators in Persian language:
[A][co-B]
[A][B]
[co-A][co-B]

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Coordinands
coordination
disjunctive coordination
Persian language
احمدخانی، جلال و همکاران.(140۱). بررسی ساخت‌های همپایه تقابلی در زبان فارسی.  مجله‌ی زبان و        زبان‌شناسی، 18(36)،
احمدی­گیوی، حسن. (1383). دستور تطبیقی زبان ترکی و فارسی. تهران: قطره.
احمدی­گیوی، حسن. و حسن انوری (1375). دستور زبان فارسی1، چاپ هیجدهم(ویرایش دوم). تهران:    فاطمی.
باطنی، محمدرضا.(1386). توصیف ساختمان دستوری زبان فارسی. تهران: امیر کبیر.
شعبانی،منصور.(1389). ساخت همپایه، با نگاهی به فارسی. مجله ادب‌پژوهی، 13، 131-156.
طبیب‌زاده، اُمید. (1390). دستور زبان فارسی، براساس نظریۀ گروه های خودگردان، درچارچوب دستور وابستگی، تهران، نشر مرکز.
غلامعلی‌زاده ،خسرو.(1386 ).ساخت زبان فارسی. تهران: احیا کتاب.
فالک، جولیا .(1377). زبان شناسی و زبان، ترجمه خسرو غلامعلی زاده، چاپ پنجم، مشهد، آستان قدس رضوی.
فرشیدور،خسرو.(1382). دستور مفصل امروز. تهران : سخن. جلد1.
کریمی،یادگار و واعظی، هنگامه. (۱۳۹۷). ادغام موازی، اشراف چندگانه و ساختار همپایگی پرسشواژه‌ای. پژوهشهای زبانی، 9(1)، 39-58.
ماهوتیان، شهرزاد.(1384 ).دستور زبان فارسی از دیدگاه رده‌شناسی.ترجمه مهدی سمائی. تهران:نشر مرکز.
ناتل خانلری، پرویز.( 1386 ). دستور زبان فارسی .تهران: توس.
نغزگوی کهن.مهرداد.(139۲) .بررسی کلمات ربط تقابلی در زبان فارسی. جستارهای زبانی، 4، 245-265.    نغزگوی کهن، مهرداد و احمدخانی، جلال. (۱۳۹۴). همپایگی عطفی در زبان فارسی. نشریه پژوهش‌های زبان‌شناسی تطبیقی، 5(10)، 197-217.
وحیدیان کامیار، تقی و عمرانی، غلامرضا. (1383) دستور زبان فارسی(1) .تهران:سمت.
Gazdar, K. (1985). Generalized phrase structure grammar. Harvard University Press.                                                          
Hansen.F&Ramm.W(2008).Subordination versus‘Coordination’in Sentence and Text. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Hartmann, K (2000), Right Node Raising and Gapping: Interface Conditions
   on Prosodic Deletion. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Haspelmath.M (2004). Coordinating constructions. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Haspelmath.M (2007) in: Shopen.T(2007) , "ed". Language typology and syntactic description. Cambridge University Press .
Mauri ,C. (2008). Coordination relations in the language of Europe and beyond. Mouton de Gruyter.
Mauri,C. & Ramat.A,G. (2009). Grammaticalization of Coordinating Intercausal Connectives. The Case of Adversatives.
Ramat, G. & C. Mauri (2011). The Grammaticalization of Coordinating Interclausal               Connectives, in Heiko Narrog and Bernd Heine (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of   Grammaticalization (pp. 653-664). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mithun, M. (1988). Coordinating constructions. in  Haspelmath.M (2004) , Coordinating constructions "ed"Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.                                           
Niina N. Z. (2009). Coordination in syntax. Cambridge University Press.
Ritva, L."ed" .(2008). Cross linguistic studies of clause combining. John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam, Philadelphia.
Stilo,D. (2004). Coordination in three Western Iranian languages  in Haspelmath.M. (2004). "ed, Coordinating constructions. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.                                         
Wälchli, B. (2005). Co-compounds and natural coordination. Oxford University Press.
دوره 17، شماره 2
اسفند 1405
صفحه 1-28

  • تاریخ دریافت 29 مرداد 1403
  • تاریخ بازنگری 04 اسفند 1403
  • تاریخ پذیرش 10 اسفند 1403