The Persian Light Verbs’ Productivity

Eshaghi, Mahdie; Karimi Doustan, Gholamhosain

doi:10.22059/jolr.2021.315912.666682

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

¹ Posterior Ph.D. in Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

² Professor of Linguistics, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.22059/jolr.2021.315912.666682

Abstract

Rhythmic characteristics of speech based on consonantal and vocalic intervals as well as syllabic intervals vary between speakers of the same language. Nonetheless, the rhythmicity of a speech signal is not solely dependent on the durational variability of phonetic intervals but it is also associated with the variability of the intensity patterns as well. Acoustic parameter of intensity is largely determined by the articulatory behaviors of the speech organs such as lip movement or mouth aperture. Therefore, it is plausible that speaker idiosyncrasy in movement of speech articulators and anatomical differences in individual’s vocal tracts may influence the energy distribution across a speech signal which subsequently leads to the variability in the values of the intensity measures. Using experimental phonetics tools and from an explicitly speaker-specific perspective, the present research attempts to explore potential speaker-specific acoustic parameters of speech rhythm which are extracted from the intensity contours across Persian speakers. This research aims to discover whether intensity-based measures of speech rhythm are able to discriminate between speakers in Persian. Two types of acoustic rhythmic measures based on the mean syllable intensity (stdevM, varcoM, rPVIm, nPVIm) and peak syllable intensity (stdevP, varcoP, rPVIp, nPVIp)) were selected for this study. Speech data from 12 Persian male speakers were recorded non-contemporaneously in laboratory environment on two different occasions separated by one to two weeks. Speech tokens were acoustically measured with PRAAT version 5.2.34 and statistical analyses were carried out with SPSS version 21 and R version 3.3.3. Results of the study indicated that speech rhythm measures based on intensity fluctuations play an important role in between-speaker rhythmic variability. In addition, discriminatory power of intensity-based measures is not affected by the language-dependent characteristics of Persian. The results also showed that the peak syllable intensity measures carry more speaker-specific information compared to the mean syllable intensity measures

Keywords

References

Acquaviva,P. 2008 . Roots and lexicality in distributed morphology. In A.Galani, D. Redinger and N.Yeo (EDs). Special issues of York working papers in linguistics.(pp.1-21) NewYork:University of New York.

Baayen, H. and Lieber, R.1991. Productivity and English derivation: a corpus-based study. Linguistics 29. pp 801-843.

Baayen, H. 1993. Quantitative aspects of morphological productivity. In G..

BarDal,J. 2008.Productivity. Amesterdom: Jhon Benjamin publication.

Bijankhan, M. 2018. Corpus of Persian search engine program .ICT research institute, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian].

Bobaljik, J. 2015. Distributed Morphology.ReVEL,13, 24. University of Connecticut.

Bobaljik, J. 1994.What does adjacency do? In: The morphology syntax connection. The MIT working papers in Linguistics,22,1-32.

Borer, H. 2014 . The category of roots. . In R.Alexiadou, H. Borer and F. Schafer (EDs). The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax. (pp.112-149).Oxford:Oxford university Press.

Borer, H. 2003. Exo-skeletal vs. endo-skeletal explanations: syntactic projections and the lexicon. In J.C.Moore and M. Polinsky (Eds). The nature of explanations in linguistic theory. (pp. 37-67). Chicago: Chicago university Press.

Dabir-moghaddam, M. 2005. Compound verb in Persian. Persian Linguistic Research: A Collection of Articles. University Publishing center, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian].

Embick, David. 2015. The Morpheme: A Theoretical Introduction. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.

Embick,D & Marantz, A. 2006 . Architecture and blocking. Ms,University of Pennsylvania and MIT.

Eshaghi, M. 2020. The Emergence and Productivity of Light Verb and its role in Event structure. PhD thesis, Tehran University, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian].

Farshidvard, Kh. 1994. Compound verb and its structure. Ashena publication center, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian].

Folli, R., Harley, H. & Karimi, S. 2004.Determinant of event type in Persian complex predicates.Lingua, 115,10:1365-140.

Grimshaw, Jane & Mester, A. (1988). Light verbs and q-theory. Linguistic Inquiry 19:205-232.

Halle, M. 1990. An approach to morphology. North eastern linguistic society 20(1).pp. 150-184.

Halle, M & Marantz, A. 1993. Distributed Morphology and the pieces of Inflection. In K, Hale and S. J. Keyser (EDs). The View from Building . pp.117-176. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Harley, H. 2014. On the Identity of Roots. Theoretical Linguistics ,40 (3).pp.225-276.

Harley, H. 2009. Roots and Locality. Handout from root workshop. Stuttgart University.

Harley, H. & Noyer. R. 2000. Formal versus encyclopedic properties of Vocabulary: Evidence from nominalizations. In B. Peeters (ED).Lexicon-Encyclopedic Interface. pp.349-374.Amesterdam:Elsevier Press.

Jackendoff, R. 1990. Semantic Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Jespersen, O. 1965. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles (5). London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd.

Karimi, S. 1997. Persian Complex Verbs: Idiomatic or Compositional. Lexicology 3, 273–318.

Karimi-Doostan,G. 2008. Event Structure of verbal nouns and light verbs. In S.Karimi, V.Samiian and D. Stilo (EDs). Aspects of Iranian linguistics. (pp.206-226). NewCastle:Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Karimi- Doostan,G. 2005.Light verb and structural case. Lingua. Vol.115(12).

Karimi-Doostan, G. 1997. Light verb constructions in Persian. Doctoral dissertation, University of Essex.

Khanlari, p. 1994. Persian Grammar. Toos publication center, Tehran, Iran. [In Persian].

Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, Illinois: Chicago University Press.

Levin, B. & Rappaport Hovav, M. 1998. Morphology and Lexical Semantics. In A. Zwicky and A. Spencer (Eds). Handbook of Morphology. (pp. 248-271). Blackwell, Oxford.

Levinson, L. 2014.The ontology of roots and verbs. . In R.Alexiadou, H. Borer and F. Schafer (EDs). The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax. (pp.208-230).Oxford:Oxford university Press.

Marantz,A.2013.Verbal argument structure: Events and participants.Lingua 130:152–168.

Marantz, A. 2009. Roots, re- and affected agents: Can roots pull the agent under little v. Workshop roots: Word formation from perspective of “core lexical elements. Stuttgart university.

Marantz, A. 2000. Roots: The universality of roots and pattern morphology. Conference on Afro-Asiatic Language. Paris University.

Marantz, A. 1997.No escapef from syntax : Don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon. In A.Dimitriadis et al. University of Pensylvania working papers in linguistics. (pp. 201-225). Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia.

Marantz, A. 1988. Clitics, Morphological merger and the mapping to phonological structure. New York: Academic Press.

Marantz, A. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Megerdoomian,K. 2001. Event Structure and Complex Predicates in Persian. Canadian Journal of Linguistics(46).pp. 97-125

Panagiotidis, P. 2015. Categorial features: A general theory of Word class categories. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.

Panagiotidis, P. 2011. Categorial features and categorizers. The linguistic review 28(3). Pp. 325-346.

Pustejovsky, J. 1991. The Syntax of Event Structure. In B. Levin and S. Pinker (EDs). lexical and Conceptual Semantics .(pp. 47-87). Cambridge: Blackwell.

Robdeutscher, A. 2014. When roots license and when they respect semantico-syntactic structure in verbs. In R.Alexiadou, H. Borer and F. Schafer (EDs). The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax. (pp.282-310).Oxford:Oxford university Press.

Samvelian, P. and Faghiri, P. 2013. Persian Complex Predicates: How Compositional are They? Semantics-Syntax Interface 1, pp. 43-74.

Siddiqi, D. 2009. Syntax Within word: economy, allomorphy, and argument selection in Distributed Morphology. Amesterdom:John Benjamins.

Sorace, A.2000. Gradients in auxiliary selection in intransitive verbs.Language. PP. 859-890.

Stevenson,S.& Fazly,A.& North,R. 2004. Statistical measure of semi-productivity of light verb constructions. In: Proceedings of ACL’04 workshop on multiword expressions. pp. 1-8.

Trias, P.S. 2010. Complex Word formation and the morphology-syntax interface. Doctoral dissertation: Barcelona University.

Yim, Ch. 2018. Categorization in distributed morphology: A split analysis of verbalization. Korean journal of language and linguistics (18). pp. 173-193.

Language Research

The Persian Light Verbs’ Productivity

References

References

Volume 12, Issue 2
December 2022
Pages 1-28

The Persian Light Verbs’ Productivity

References

References

Volume 12, Issue 2December 2022Pages 1-28

Volume 12, Issue 2
December 2022
Pages 1-28