Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate General Linguistics, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

2 Professor of General Linguistics, Faculty of Literature and Humanities, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

The Vocative construction is one of the earliest conceptions acquired by children. So it must be a universal phenomenon. It is surprising that it had been rarely studied. While the vocative is a building block of sentences, although non-obligatory, it has often been approached from a non-linguistics perspective. This paper aims to investigate both the internal/syntactic structure of the vocative phrase and its syntactic position in Persian within the framework of Minimalist Theory. To do this, the data are collected addressee, which is identified by the vocative phrase (VocP), is a functional projection derived by a bundle of morpho-syntactic and semantic features. In the one hand, the projection is located above the functional projections of the nominal domain and the determiner phrase (DP). On the other hand, it is located in the left periphery of the sentence. The vocative phrase located between the topicalized and focused phrases as a result of topic and focus movement in the language. The phrase may or may not be co-indexed with a constituent in the main clause. Although vocative phrases are not morphologically marked in Modern Persian, there are elements such as “Ey”, “Âhây” and “hey” which are sign of vocative in Persian, named vocative particles. These particles are optional, however, located in the vocative phrase. The particles, also, are different stylistically. The fisrt one is used in literary style and the second two particles are used in colloquial style. Moreover, the vocative head is shown to take a DP complement. The DP merges with the head of the phrase, as its complement Vocative particles are proposed to bear an uninterpretable D-feature along with the some other morpho-syntactic features. Checking these features make the DP complement to be interpreted as vocative in the LF, namely the vocative DP. The distribution of vocative particles indicates that the “EY” particle is a bound morpheme but “Âhây” and “Hey” are free morphemes. The projection is prosodically marked by pause and linearly followed by a comma

Keywords

Main Subjects

Adger, D. 2003. Core Syntax: a Minimalist Approach, Oxford: Oxford University Press.   
Anoushe, M. 2010. Topicalization and Focalization in Persian: A Feature-  based Approach, Language Researches, Volume1. Issue 1, P 1-28.[in Persoan]  
Chomsky, N. 2001,‘Derivation by Phase’. In Ken Hale: A Life in Language, ed. M. Kenstowicz, 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press       
Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and Functional heads. A cross linguistic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press
Citko, B. 2014. Phase Theory: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Espinal, M.T. 2010. On the structure of vocatives. Paper presented at  the Vocative! Workshop. Bamberg: University of Bamberg. December 10th 2010.
Frashidvard, Kh, 2006.Today’s Grammar of Persian. Tehran, Sokhan.[in Persian]   
Ghomeshi, J. 1996. Projection and inflection: a study of Persian phrase structure. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Toronto.
Grohmann, K. 2003. Prolific Domains: On the Antilocality of Movement Dependencies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haegeman, L. and J. Guéron, 1999. English Grammar: A Generative Perspective. Oxford & Malden: Blackwell.
Hill, V. 2007. Vocatives and the pragmatics-syntax interface. Lingua, 117(12), 2077-2105.
Hill, V., & Stavrou, M. 2014. Vocatives: How Syntax Meets with Pragmatics. Leiden, Netheland: Brill.
Karimi, S. 2005. A Minimalist Approach to Scrambling: Evidence from Persian, The Hague: Mouton.
Lazard, G. 1957. Grammaire de Persan Contemporan, 1st., Paris:Librairie. [in Persian]
Longobardi, G. 1994. Reference and proper names: A theory of Nmovement in Syntax and Logical Form. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609-  665.
Mauck, S & R Zanuttini. 2004. The subjects of English imerativesn Georgetown University working papers in theoretical linguistics edited by C. Brandstetter & D. Rus. Washigton, DC: Georgetown university Department of Linguistics. 53-85
Moro, Andrea. 2001. Notes on vocative case; A case study in clausestructure. In Romance Languages and Linguistic theory 2001: Selected papers from Going Romance, edited by Josef Quer, Jan Schroten Mauro Scorretti, Petra Sleeman and Els Verhuegd. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Portner, P. 2004. Vocatives, Topics and Imperatives. IM Workshop on Information Structure, Bad Teinach.