Cover not available

Article published In: Constructions and Frames
Vol. 14:2 (2022) ► pp.262–300

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Modelling polysemy and categorial ambiguity in a constructional family

The case of agentive compounds in Persian

 | University of Isfahan
 | University of Isfahan
 | Leiden University
Published online: 22 December 2022
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cf.21007.azi
Abstract
In this paper we analyse a family of compound constructions in Persian that show two interesting properties: (1) they split into two semantic patterns, human agent noun and instrument noun, and (2) they display categorial ambiguity between noun and adjective. The compounds in question, which are formed with the verbal stem -yāb ‘find’, are collected from diachronic and synchronic corpora and analysed in the framework of Construction Morphology ( (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). We argue that the instrumental pattern is an innovation under the influence of loan-translated English instrument nouns. This pattern dovetailed with a much older morphological construction for human agent nouns. This raises questions about the relation between the two constructions in the contemporary speaker’s lexicon. For the dual functionality of the words as nouns and adjectives, we argue that it can be understood as a second order schema (Booij, G., & Masini, F. (2015). The role of second order schemas in the construction of complex words. In L. Bauer, L. Körtvèlyessy & P. Štekauer (Eds.), Semantics of complex words (pp. 47–66). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) or sister construction (Jackendoff, R., & Audring, J. (2019). Relational Morphology in the Parallel Architecture. In J. Audring & F. Masini (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory (pp. 390–408). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, (2020). The texture of the lexicon. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), whereby no precedence is ascribed to either of the two patterns.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Construction morphology
  • 3.Semantic classification
  • 4.Relations within the constructional family
    • 4.1Metaphorical extension of human agent to instrument
    • 4.2The diachrony of the [X-yāb] compounds
    • 4.3Loan translation
    • 4.4Relatedness
  • 5.Agent nouns and agentive adjectives as sister constructions
    • 5.1Nominal and adjectival uses
      • 5.1.1Syntactic configurations
      • 5.1.2Morphological and semantic configurations
    • 5.2Sister constructions
  • 6.Summary and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations
  • References
References (59)
References
Al-Biruni, M. (5th century AH / 11th century AD). The exhaustive treatise on shadows, translated by E. S. Kennedy (1976). Institute for the History of Arabic Science.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anvari, H., & Ahmadi Givi, H. (1999). Persian grammar, Vol. 2 (Dasture Zabān-e Fārsi, jeld 2). Fatemi. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Audring, J. (2019). Mothers or sisters? The encoding of morphological knowledge. Word Structure, 12(3), 274–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beard, R. (1990). The nature and origins of derivational polysemy. Lingua, 811, 101–140. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G. (1986). Form and meaning in morphology: The case of Dutch ‘agent nouns’. Linguistics, 241, 503–517. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005). The Grammar of words. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Morphological analysis. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammatical Analysis (pp. 563–589). Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2012). Construction Morphology, a brief introduction. Morphology, 221, 343–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2017). Inheritance and motivation in Construction Morphology. In N. Gisborne & A. Hippisley (Eds.), Defaults in Morphological Theory (pp. 18–39). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G. & Audring, J. (2018). Partial motivation, multiple motivation: The role of output schemas in morphology. In G. Booij (Ed.), The construction of words. Advances in Construction Morphology (pp. 59–80). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G., & Masini, F. (2015). The role of second order schemas in the construction of complex words. In L. Bauer, L. Körtvèlyessy & P. Štekauer (Eds.), Semantics of complex words (pp. 47–66). Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft, W. (2007). Construction Grammar. In D. Geeraerts & H. Cuyckens (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics (pp. 463–509). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive Linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
HasanDoust, M. (2013). Persian etymological dictionary (Farhange Riʃe ʃenɑ̃xtiye Zaban-e Farsi). Academy of Persian Language and Literature. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Th., & Trousdale, G. (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R., & Audring, J. (2019). Relational Morphology in the Parallel Architecture. In J. Audring & F. Masini (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory (pp. 390–408). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2020). The texture of the lexicon. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kahnemuyipour, A. (2014). Revisiting the Persian ezafe construction: A Roll-up Movement Analysis. Lingua, 1501, 1–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kalbasi, I. (1992). The derivative structure of words in Modern Persian (Sāxt-e Ešteqāqi-ye Vāʒe dar Fārsi-ye Emrouz). Institute of Humanity and Cultural Studies. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keshani, Kh. (1993). Zansu Dictionary (Farhang-e Zānsu). University Publication Center. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khanlari, P. (1973). Persian Grammar (Dastur-e zabān-e Fārsi). Toos. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khatibi, A. (2007). Comprehensive Persian Language Dictionary, Persian Lexicography Corpus and Computer-based Language Corpus (Farhang-e Jāmeɂ-e Zabān-e Fārsi, Peykare-ye Farhangnegāri-ye Fārsi va Peykare-hā-ye Rāyaneɂiye Zabān). Lexigraphy, 1(1), 4–60. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khayyampour, A. (1993). Persian Grammar (Dastur-e zabān-e Fārsi). Sotoude. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Khormaee, A. (2008). Clipped compound agentive adjectives: Yes or No? (Sefat-e fāɂeli-ye morakab-e moraxam: āri yā xeir?). Language and Linguistics, 4(7), 64–80. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lazard, G. (2005). A grammar of contemporary Persian. Mazda Publications in assoc. with Bibliotheca Persica.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lüdtke, J. (2005). Romanische Wortbildung. Inhaltlich – diachronisch – synchronisch. Stauffenburg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luschützky, H. Ch., & Rainer, F. (2011). Agent noun polysemy in cross-linguistic perspective. Language Typology and Universals, 64(4), 287–338. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mashkur, M. J. (1989). A Pamphlet on Persian morphology and syntax (Dasturnāme dar Sarf va Nahv-e Zabān-e Pārsi). Institute of the East Press. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Masini, F., & Audring, J. (2019). Construction Morphology. In J. Audring & F. Masini (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Morphological Theory (pp. 365–389). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Menéndez Pidal, R. (1968). Manual de gramática histórica española (13th edition). Espasa-Calpe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meshkatoddini, M. (2005). Persian grammar (Dastur-e zabān-e Fārsi). Samt. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Meyer-Lübke, W. (1890). Italienische Grammatik. Reisland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morrison, J. E. (2006). The astrolabe. Janus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nobahar, M. (1993). Practical Persian grammar (Dastur-e Kārbordi-ye Zabān-e Fārsi). Hafez. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panagl, O. (1975). Kasustheorie und Nomina Agentis. In H. Rix (Ed.), Flexion und Wortbildung. Akten der V. Fachtagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft, Regensburg, 9–14 September 1973 (pp. 232–146). Reichert.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1978). Agens und Instrument in der Wortbildung. In W. U. Dressler & W. Meid (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Linguists. Vienna, 28 August- 2 September 1977 (pp. 453–456). Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rafiei, A. (2008). A study of the semantics of Persian derivational suffixes (Barresiye Maɂnāɂiye Vandhāye Ešteqāqiye Farsi), Ph.D dissertation, Allameh Tabataba’i University. [In Persian]
Rafiei, A., & Rezaei, H. (2018). Derived nouns ending in -gar based on Construction Morphology (Sāxt-e Asāmi-ye Moštaq az -gar az Manzar-e Sarf-e Sāxti). Jostārhāye Zabāni, 10(3), 71–94. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rainer, F. (2004a). Del nombre de agente al nombre de instrument en español: ¿Cómo y cuándo? Iberoromania, 591, 97–122. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004b). L’origine dei nomi di strumento italiani in -tor. In T. Krisch, T. Lindner, & U. Müller (Eds.), Analecta homini universali dicata. Festschrift für Oswald Panagl zum 65. Geburtstag. Vol.11 (pp. 399–424). Heinz.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005a). Noms d’instruments/ de lieux en -tor dans la Galloromania, Vox Romanica, 641, 121–140.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2005b). Semantic change in word formation. Linguistics, 43(2), 415–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). The agent-instrument-place “polysemy” of the suffix -tor in Romance. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 11, 5–12.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sadeghi, A. A. (2001). Language planning in Iran: A historical review. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 1481, 19–30. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Compounds formed with the present stem of a verb (Kalamāt-e Morakab-e Sāxtešode bā Setāk-e Feɂl). Farhangestan Journal, 1(1), 5–11. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(Ed.). (2013). Comprehensive Persian Language Dictionary (Farhang-e Jāmeɂ-e Zabān-e Fārsi). Academy of Persian Language and Literature. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Saussure, F. de. (1959). Course in General Linguistics. Philosophical Library. (Translation of Cours de linguistique générale, 1915.)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shaghaghi, V. (2012). Morphology: The Basics (Mabāni-ye Sarf). Samt. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shariat, M. J. (1970). Persian Grammar (Dastur-e Zabān-e Fārsi). Asatir. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shieber, S. M. (1986). An introduction to unification-based approaches to grammar CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Soltanigard Faramarzi, A. (1997). From word to discourse (Az Kalame tā Kalām). Heidari.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tabataba’i, A. (2003a). Clipped compound agentive adjectives (Sefat-e Fāɂeli-ye Morakab-e Moraxam). Farhangestan Journal, 6(2), 62–71. [In Persian].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003b). Persian noun and adjective compounds (Esm va Sefat-e Morakab dar Zaban-e Farsi). Markaz nashre daneshgahi. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Compounding in Persian (Tarkib dar Zabān-e Fārsi). Academy of Persian Language and Literature. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Torabi, S. (2014). A Construction Morphology Account of Agentive Suffixes in Persian (Barresiye Vandhā-ye Ešteqāqiye Esm-e ɂāmelsāz-e Zabān-e Farsi dar Čārčub-e Sarf-e Sāxtmehvar), MA thesis, University of Isfahan. [In Persian]
Vahidian Kamyar, T.; Omrani, Q. (2006). Persian Grammar, Vol. 1 (Dasture Zabān-e Fārsi, jeld 1). Samt. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zomorrodiyan, R. (1970). The structure of words in Modern Persian (Sāxteman-e Kalame dar Zabān-e Fārsi-ye Konuni). Jostārhāye Zabāni, 211, 177–201. [In Persian]Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue