راحله گندمکار

This article analyzes complex words, morphologically and semantically, within the Perceptual approach introduced by Safavi (2020). The authors aim to examine the possibilities of word formation of complex words in Persian as their first objective. To achieve this goal, they examined 2850 complex words selected randomly from the Sokhan Dictionary (Anvari, 2004). Following the mentioned approach, word-formation patterns are determined based on whether the morphemes belong to closed or open classes. According to a predetermined agreement, A stands for closed class units and B stands for open class units. This study reveals 57 patterns of word formation, with ‘B + B’ appearing to be the most common among all the patterns examined. Next, the authors investigated how much closed-class units help Persian speakers interpret the semantic head of complex words examined. To reach this aim, 20 Persian speakers not having any knowledge of linguistics were given a questionnaire of 120 words made up of eight affixes selected by the authors and questioned about interpreting each word. Finally, data analysis related to the questionnaire revealed that the meaning interpretation of the words appeared to be significantly impacted by the morphemes belonging to the closed class.

This article aims at contrasting the conceptualization of space in Persian and English. Using three semantic primes of 'space', namely 'below', 'side' and 'touch' proposed in Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM), as one of the cognitive semantics approaches to study language, this cross-linguistic design intends to uncover the similarities and differences of conceptualizations in the two languages. The data came from the Hamshahri corpus of Persian-written data and the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA).The data were compared to see whether or not the NSM theory is viable to explain the spatial conceptualization. The results indicated that the semantic primes have more than one exponent in Persian and English, with their particular function and conceptual range. Besides, the prime of 'touch' has not spatial correspondence in Persian language. This means that the NSM approach does not provide enough analytical toolkits to satisfactorily explain the similarities and differences in cross-cultural cognitive semantic comparisons and cannot exhaustively explain the conceptualization of ‘space’. Nonetheless, this approach provides us with some insight into the cognitive properties in the minds of the speakers.

Idioms and collocations are part of lexical phrases which are of high importance in lexicography. One of the criteria for distinguishing these two types of phrases from each other is the inflexibility of their constituent elements. Idioms, unlike collocations, are not flexible in terms of word order and are always used in a fixed and specific form. The purpose of the present article was to show firstly whether all Persian idioms are inflexible against syntactic changes or some are flexible; secondly, to indicate how a new lexical phrase is created as a result of converting an idiom into a collocation. To illustrate this phenomenon, a new and practical definition for idioms and collocations, based on syntactic criteria not merely semantic, was provided. According to Construction Grammar, idioms were analyzed based on four syntactic tests: ‘passivization’, ‘clefting’, ‘dislocation’, and ‘interrogation’. Two hundred idioms were collected from two of the most up-to-date and comprehensive sources, namely Farsi Amiyaneh Dictionary (Abolhassan Najafi, 2008) and the two-volume Dictionary of Kenayat-e Sokhan (Hassan Anvari, 2019). Some idioms were flexible to syntactic changes, and behaved similarly to collocations. The flexibility of idioms led to introducing a new definition of these phrases based on syntactic criteria. Thus, such phrases were considered a kind of collocation, not an idiom. The result showed that converting an idiom into a collocation always creates a lexical phrase or lexeme with a new meaning. Finally, a plan was introduced to represent such idioms practically in Persian dictionaries.

This paper examines the differences between two types of categorization and then the use of conventional metaphor and metonymy and their relationship among Persian-speaking Iranians. Recent studies on categorization show that Persian speakers, similar to the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese, categorize based on thematic relationships, unlike the European Americans who categorize based upon taxonomic relations. These studies have shown that Eastern Asians, with regard to categorization, act on the syntagmatic axis and the units in the context, and Westerners act upon the paradigmatic axis. Therefore, the hypothesis was put forth that these different cognitive functions are also represented in the application of metaphor and metonymy that is, those who use the category-based classification are more likely to use metaphors, and those who are inclined to use the relationship-based categorization tend more toward using metonymy. Examining the Persian corpus of 30,000 sentences confirmed this hypothesis. Persian speakers, who categorize based on relationships, use metonymy, which works on syntagmatic axis and based on the contiguity of two things, more than metaphor, which is based on the similarity and paradigmatic relation between two entities. The present study confirms this fact again that cognition is not the same in all human beings.