Language Studies

Language Studies

Application of Graph for the Semantic Network of Non-Iranian Learners of Persian

Document Type : Research original ,Regular Article

Authors
1 PhD graduate, Department of Linguistics and Foreign Languages, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Payame Noor University (PNU), Tehran, Iran. Corresponding Author
2 Professor, Department of Linguistics and Foreign Languages, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, Payame Noor University (PNU), Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor, Department of Teaching Persian to Speakers of other Languages, Faculty of Literature and Humanity Sciences, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Basic Sciences, Payame Noor University (PNU), Tehran, Iran
Abstract
Abstract
This study, grounded in Cognitive Linguistics and Cognitive Lexical Semantics, uses a graph-theoretical approach to analyze the semantic network of high-frequency Persian verbs as understood by non-native learners. It builds on 50 foundational Persian verbs from Jamshidi et al. (2022) and involves 101 non-native Persian speakers from Imam Khomeini International University. Participants, whose native language is not Persian, used a culturally adapted version of Schur’s (2007) semantic association questionnaire to graphically represent perceived semantic relationships among the verbs. The data were modeled and visualized using co-occurrence graphs built with Java and Python.
The analysis reveals a semantic network comprising various lexical-semantic relations, including synonymy (7.27%), converse antonymy (31.32%), polysemy (2.21%), entailment (24.67%), hyponymy (22.46%), meronymy (2.21%), and collocation (34.49%). Among these, collocational patterns, antonymic contrasts, and entailment relations were most frequent. These results provide insights into the mental lexicon of L2 Persian learners, highlighting conceptual schemas and relational patterns. The study offers pedagogical implications for creating cognitively aligned teaching materials, addressing lexical acquisition gaps, and promoting cluster-based approaches in Persian as a Foreign Language curriculum development.
Keywords: Cognitive Linguistics, Lexical-Semantic Networks, Graph Theory, Second Language Acquisition, Persian as a Foreign Language (PFL)
 
Introduction
This article investigates and analyzes the semantic network of basic Persian verbs in the mental lexicon of non-Iranian learners of Persian. The study aims to identify how these learners—who have acquired Persian after their first language and beyond the critical period (as defined by Friederici, Steinhauer & Pfeifer, 2002, as ending around age twelve)—structure semantic relations among high-frequency Persian verbs. The research is framed within cognitive linguistics and lexical (cognitive) semantics. The experimental design is grounded in graph theory, utilizing Java and Python for graph construction and SPSS for statistical analysis.
Positioned within the domain of Persian language education, this study seeks to examine the conceptual and intra-linguistic relations among fifty high-frequency Persian verbs as structured by foreign learners. The significance of the research lies in its effort to compare the structural-semantic similarities of these learners’ mental lexicons with those of native speakers. The verbs were previously selected in Jamshidi et al. (2022), and the same experimental task used in that study was replicated here to enable a comparative analysis, aiming to uncover learning gaps among foreign learners. Since accurate mapping of semantic networks plays a crucial role in discourse coherence, the findings could inform methods to align foreign learners’ semantic networks more closely with those of native speakers.  
The main objective is to examine how learners conceptualize relations such as synonymy, antonymy, semantic entailment, collocation, and causality among these verbs, and how these relations manifest in their mental lexical networks. The study integrates perspectives from cognitive linguistics, lexical semantics, and computational linguistics while employing the analytical tools of graph theory to model and interpret the semantic connections formed by learners.
This study is guided by two principal research questions:    
1. What types of conceptual and intra-linguistic relations characterize the graph patterns constructed by non-native Persian learners?          
2. What are the structural features of their semantic networks for Persian basic verbs?

Materials & methods
The research adopts a field-based methodology using a questionnaire as the primary data collection instrument. A set of fifty verbs was selected through a comparative approach from the validated lists provided by Ebadi et al. (2014), Bijankhan et al. (2014), and Sahraee et al. (2017). Emphasizing frequency, as highlighted in these studies and also in Schur (2007), high-frequency verbs were randomly selected and presented to participants in the form of a questionnaire. Participants were instructed to identify semantic relationships among verbs. The collected data were then analyzed through graph visualization and interpretation.
 

Discussion
The findings reveal that the semantic networks constructed by non-native learners feature the following relational distributions: synonymy (7.27%), reversed antonymy (31.32%), polysemy (2.21%), semantic entailment (24.67%), hyponymy ("type of") (22.46%), meronymy ("part of") (2.21%), and collocation (34.49%). Among these, collocation, antonymy, and entailment occurred most frequently.       
Comparing the semantic graphs of native and non-native speakers shows that verbs such as raftan (to go), gereftan (to take), fahmidan (to understand), dādan (to give), and harekat kardan (to move) had the highest average degree in non-native learners’ graphs. In contrast, the highest-degree verbs in native speakers’ networks were anjām dādan (to do), fahmidan (to understand), raftan (to go), harekat kardan (to move), and resāndan (to deliver). The verbs fahmidan, raftan, and harekat kardan are shared among both groups, indicating partial overlap in semantic structuring.

Result
Step-by-step comparison of the semantic graphs of native speakers and foreign learners illuminated both their similarities and differences, highlighting strengths and weaknesses in learners’ mental lexicons. These insights suggest that incorporating semantic networks and conceptual schemas into educational materials for Persian learners can address persistent vocabulary learning challenges and improve verb substitution strategies. The study also identifies weaker areas among learners, such as polysemy, synonymy, meronymy, and causality, recommending deeper instructional focus on these relations in curriculum design.     
Pedagogical Recommendations          
1. To approximate the semantic networks of non-native learners to those of native speakers, workbook sections should include varied exercises demonstrating multiple senses of polysemous verbs, reinforced through repetition and contextual use.
2. When encountering negative transfer from the first language, instructors should employ contrastive analysis between Persian and the learners’ L1, using implicit corrective feedback strategies.
3. Greater emphasis should be placed on verb synonymy in Persian textbooks. Visual network mapping in classroom settings may leverage visual memory to reinforce learning and retention.
Keywords

Subjects


Bibliography:
Aitchison, J. (2003). Words in the Mind. (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Press.
Beckwith, R.; Fellbaum, C.; Gross, D. & Miller, G.A. (1991). "WordNet: A lexical database organized on psycholinguistic principles," In U. Zernik, (Ed.), Using On-line Resources to Build a Lexicon. Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, (211–32).
Besharati, N. & Mahmoodi, A. (2015). Graph Theory with Applications. PNU Press, Tehran, Iran. [in Persian].
Bhatia, T. K., & Ritchie, W. C. (1999). The bilingual child: Some issues and perspectives. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of child language acquisition. Academic Press. (569–643).
Bijankhan, M.; Nasri, A. & Jalaei, S. (2014). The Role of Frequency Lexicon in Assessing Lexical Proficiency of Persian Language Learners. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages (JTPSOL), Vol. 3, 7 ( TOME 7) (25-45). [in Persian].
Carroll, D. (2008). Psychology of Language, (5th ed.). Toronto: Thomson Wadsworth.
Chiang, J. & Dunkel, P. (1990). "The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge and listening proficiency on ELF lecture learning." TESOL Quarterly , 26 (2), (345- 374).
Clahsen, H. & Felser, C. (2006). "How native-like is non-native language processing?" Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(12), (564–570).
Clahsen, H. (2006). "Dual-Mechanism morphology," in K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, Oxford: Elsevier, (1–5).
Clahsen, H.; Sonnenstuhl, I. & Blevins, J.P. (2003). "Derivational morphology in the German mental lexicon: A dual mechanism account," in R.H. Baayen & R. Schreuder, (Eds.), Morphological Structure in Language Processing.  Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. (125-155).
Collins, M.A. & Loftus, E.F. (1975). "A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing." Psychological Review, 82(6), (407-428).
Costa, A. & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2014). "How does the bilingual experience sculpt the brain?" Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 15(5), (336–345).
De Groot ; De Bot, A.M.B. & Huebner, T. (1993). "Word-type effects in bilingual processing tasks," In R. Costa Schreuder & B. Weltens (Eds.), The Bilingual Lexicon ,Vol. 6. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. (27–51).
Ebadi, S.; Vakilifad, A. & Bahramlu, Kh. (2014). Developing a General Service Wordlist for Persian Language: An Integrated Approach. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages (JTPSOL), Vol. 3, 3 (TOME 8), (4-23).  [in Persian]
Estivalet, G.L. & Meunier, F.E. (2016b). "Morphological operations in French verbal inflection: Automatic, Atomic, and Obligatory." Lingua, vol 240, (167-198).
Estivalet, G.L. (2016). Mental Lexicon Architecture and Morphological Processing of French Verbs, Ph.D. Thesis. France: Université de Lyon.
Fellbaum, Ch. (1998). A semantic network of English: The mother of all WordNets. Computers and the Humanities, Vol. 32, (209-220).
Field, J. (2003). Psycholinguistics: A resource book for students. London: Routledge.
Friederici, A.D.; Steinhauer, K. & Pfeifer, E. (2002). "Brain signatures of artificial language processing: Evidence challenging the critical period hypothesis." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 99(1), (529–534).
Fries, C. (1957). The Structure of English: An Introduction to the Construction of English Sentences. London: Longmans & Green.
Gentner, D. & France, I. (1988). "The Verb mutability effect: Studies of the combinatorial semantics of nouns and verbs," in S. Small, G. Cottrell &  M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Lexical Ambiguity Resolution. Los Altos, Calif.: Morgan Kaufmann. (343-382).
Guida, A. & Lenci, A. (2007). "Semantic properties of word associations of Italian verbs." Rivista di Linguistica. 19(2), (293-326).
Halle, M. & Marantz, A. (1993). "Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection," in K. Hale & S.J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. (111–176).
Hernandez, A.; Li, P. & MacWhinney, B. (2005). "The emergence of competing modules in bilingualism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), (220–225).
Levine, N.; Levine, R. & Levine, H. (2005). English Vocabulary for High School Students. London: Amsco School.
Meara, P. (1983). "Word associations in a foreign language." Nottingham Linguistics Circular, 11 (2),(29-38). 
Nasib Zarraby,F; Pahlavannezhad, M. & Mashhadi, A. (2015). The sound level structure in Farsi speakers’ mental lexicon: A priming study. Journal of Linguistics & Khorasan Dialects.Volume 7, Issue 12 , Serial Number 12. (101-120). [in Persian]
Ruhlen, M. (2007). An American Etymological Dictionary. California: Stanford University Press.
Rumelhart, D.E. (1977). "Theoretical models and processes of reading," in H. Sinder & R.B. Ruddell (eds.), Towards an Interactive Model of Reading. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.)719-747(
Sahraee, R.; Talebi, M. & Mojiri, A.H. (2017). Basic Words in Persian: A Comparison of Six Studies. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages (JTPSOL), Vol. 6, 1 (TOME 13). [in Persian].
Schur, E. (2007). Insights into the structure of L1 and L2 vocabulary networks:Intimations of small worlds. In H. Daller, J. Milton and Treffers-daller (Eds.), Modelling and Assessing Vocabulary Knowledge Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. , (182-203).
Shemshadi, A. (2002). Second language learning and mental schema .Daneshvar Medicine: Basic and Clinical Reaserch Journal. Volume 9, Serial Number 36, )105-116(. [in Persian]
Sigman, M. & Cecchi, G.A. (2002). "Global organization of the lexicon." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99(3),)1742-1747(.
Sigman, M. & Cecchi, G.A. (2002). Global organization of the lexicon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. Feb 2002, 99 (3), (1742-1747).
Silva, R.C. (2019). Schema theory: An introduction and its application in EFL reading classroom. Brasil: Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba.
Sotoudehnama, E. & Solgi, F. (2017). Second language vocabulary learning: Etymology or synonymy? Journal of Language Research. Volume 9, Issue 23, (105-120). . [in Persian].
Ullman, M.T. (2001). "The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4(02), (105–122).
Wolter, B. (2001). "Comparing the L1 and L2 mental lexicon: A depth of individual word knowledge model."  Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 23(1), 41-69.
 
Volume 15, Issue 2
September 2025
Pages 235-289

  • Receive Date 26 October 2024
  • Revise Date 14 April 2025
  • Accept Date 16 April 2025