Cover not available
Part of
Advances in Iranian Linguistics
Edited by Richard K. Larson, Sedigheh Moradi and Vida Samiian
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 351] 2020
► pp. 137–154

Chapter 8
Topic agreement, experiencer constructions, and the weight of clitics

It has been claimed that in some Iranian languages like Sorani Kurdish enclitic pronouns shifted to verbal agreement markers via topic agreement, i.e. hanging topics resumed by enclitic pronouns are reanalysed as subjects cross-indexed by agreement markers. In this study, we suggest a bridging context for the reanalysis of topic agreement as verbal agreement by assuming that verbal endings (the inherited agreement markers) and enclitic pronouns represent the same degree or weight of encoding. We further compare the historical findings with the cross-reference patterns found in New Persian experiencer constructions. These constructions show a similar development, and we provide evidence that the relation of experiencer and cross-indexing enclitic pronoun qualifies as agreement.
Keywords: enclitic pronouns, agreement, reanalysis, experiencer construction, Middle Iranian, Modern Persian
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Reanalysis of enclitic pronouns as agreement markers
    • 2.1Keeping pronouns and agreement markers apart
    • 2.2Interim results
  • 3.Experiencer constructions in Modern Persian
  • 4.Historical background of experiencer constructions
  • 5.Summary
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
Published online: 22 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.351.08jug
References (29)
References
Alizadeh, Ghazaleh. 1991. Xāne-ye edrisihāi. [Novel.] Tehran: Tus.Google Scholar
. 1999. Šabhā-ye Tehrān. [Novel.] Tehran: Tus.Google Scholar
Amrishahi, Mahshid. 1998. Mādarān va doxtarān. [Novel.] Stockholm: Ferdosi.Google Scholar
Barjasteh, Darab. 1983. Morphology, syntax and semantics of Persian compound verbs: A lexical approach. University of Illinois dissertation.Google Scholar
Boyce, Mary. 1975. A reader in Manichaean Middle Persian and Parthian. Téhéran: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Bynon, Theodora. 1979. The ergative construction in Kurdish. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 42. 211–224. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cereti, Carlo G. 1995. The Zand ī Wahman Yasn – A Zoroastrian apocalypse. Roma: Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente.Google Scholar
Coghill, Eleanor. 2016. The rise & fall of ergativity in Aramaic – Cycles of alignment change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Čunakova, Olga M. 1987. Kniga dejanij Ardašira syna Papaka. Moskau: NAUK.Google Scholar
Dabir-Moghaddam, Mohammad. 1997. Compound verbs in Persian. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 27. 25–59.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 1987. The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63(4). 805–855. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gignoux, Philippe. 1984. Le livre d’Ardā Vīrāz – translitération, transcription et traduction du texte pehlevi. Paris: Editions Recherche sur les Civilisations.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 1971. Historical syntax and synchronic morphology: An archaeologist’s field trip. Papers from the 7th Regional Meeting Chicago Linguistic Society, April 16–18, 1971, 394–415. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
Golchin Arefi, Mandeh. 2012. Barresi-e sāxt-e qeyr-e šaxsi dar zabān-e fārsi. Vijenāme-ye Farhangestan 7. 162–182.Google Scholar
Jügel, Thomas. 2009. Ergative Remnants in Sorani Kurdish?. Orientalia Suecana 58. 142–158.Google Scholar
. 2015. Die Entwicklung der Ergativkonstruktion im Alt- und Mitteliranischen – eine korpusbasierte Untersuchung zu Kasus, Kongruenz und Satzbau. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jügel, Thomas & Pollet Samvelian. 2016. Les «pronoms» clitiques dans les langues iraniennes occidentales. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 111(1). 391–432.Google Scholar
Karimi, Simin. 2005. A Minimalist approach to scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kazeminejad, Ghazaleh. 2014. Pronominal complex predicates in Colloquial Persian. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
Lazard, Gilbert. 1957. Grammaire du persan contemporain. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Mahmud, Ahmad. 1974. Hamsāyehā. [Novel.] Tehran: Amir Kabir.Google Scholar
Pakzad, Fazlollah (ed.). 2005. Bundahišn – Zoroastrische Kosmogonie und Kosmologie I: Kritische Edition. Tehran: Centre for the Great Islamic Encyclopaedia.Google Scholar
Parsipour, Shahrnush. 1973. Sag o zemestān-e bolandi. [Novel.] Tehran: Amir Kabir.Google Scholar
Rasekhmahand, Mohammad. 2010. Persian clitics adjacent to verbs. Journal of Researches in Linguistics Studies 2(2). 75–85.Google Scholar
Samvelian, Pollet. 2018. Specific features of Persian syntax: The Ezafe construction, differential object marking and complex predicates. In Anousha Sedighi & Pouneh Shabani-Jadidi (eds.), Oxford handbook of Persian linguistics, 226–269. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sedighi, Anousha. 2010. Agreement restrictions in Persian. Leiden: Leiden University Press.Google Scholar
Shaked, Shaul. 1979. The wisdom of the Sasanian sages (Dēnkard VI). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Vahidian-Kamkar, Taghi. 2004. Fe’lhā-ye yek šenāse. Nāme-ye Farhangestān-e zabān 2/6. 29–37.Google Scholar
Windfuhr, Gernot L. 1979. Persian grammar: History and state of its study. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Musavi, S. Fatemeh
2024. The Avestan ī̆šti- in Middle Persian texts. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 87:1 ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.