نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار دانشگاه فرهنگیان

چکیده

تحقیق حاضر نقش‌‌نماهای اسم فارسی را در پاره‌‌‌گفتارهای گویشوران ترکی‌‌‌آذربایجانی، براساس مدل چهار تکواژ مطالعه نموده است. داده‌‌ها از منابع معتبر مرتبط با دستور زبان ترکی‌آذربایجانی و تعاملات زبانی گویشوران مناطق مرکزی استان اردبیل (30 نفر) .گردآوری شد. ابتدا نقش‌‌نماهای اسم فارسی در چارچوب مدل چهار تکواژ، به تکواژهای محتوایی (حروف‌اضافه)، تکواژهای نظام‌‌مند متقدم (حروف‌ندا) و تکواژ نظام‌‌‌مند پیونددهندۀ متأخر (کسرۀ‌‌اضافه) طبقه‌‌بندی شد. با بررسی داده‌ها، مشخص گردید که برخی از حروف‌‌‌ندای فارسی به‌صورت عناصر قرضی در زبان ترکی‌‌‌آذربایجانی رایج هستند درحالی که تعدادی از حروف‌‌اضافۀ آن زبان، طی فرایند رمزگردانی‌‌زبانی، در گفتار دوزبانه‌های ‌‌‌‌‌ترکی‌‌‌‌‌آذربایجانی-فارسی ظاهر می‌‌شوند. کسرۀ‌اضافه نیز طبق پیوستار رمزگردانی-قرض‌‌‌گیری میرزاسکاتن (1993)، در حد فاصل بین حروف‌ندا و حروف‌اضافه قرار دارد. به نظر می‌‌‌رسد که بین ماهیت انواع مختلف تکواژها (فعال شدن تکواژها در سطوح انتزاعی تولید گفتار) و ترتیب ورود آنها به زبان یا گویش دیگر، ارتباط وجود دارد. تکواژهای محتوایی اعطاکنندۀ نقش‌‌های تتا در مقایسه با تکواژهای نظام‌مند، به ندرت توسط گویشوران یک زبان به عاریت گرفته می‌شوند. همچنین راه‌‌یابی تکواژهای نظام‌‌مند متقدم به زبان یا گویش‌‌‌های دیگر راحت‌تر از تکواژهای نظام‌مند متأخر صورت می‌‌پذیرد. زیرا تکواژهای نظام‌‌‌مند متأخر در سطح متأخرتر فرایند تولید انتزاعی، با فراخوان چارچوب نحوی-ساختواژی زبان ماتریس، انتخاب می‌شوند، درحالی که انتخاب تکواژهای نظام‌‌‌مند متقدم به‌‌صورت غیرمستقیم در سطح مفهومی-واژگانی و همزمان با انتخاب مستقیم تکواژهای محتوایی زبان ماتریس یا زبان درونه، صورت می‌‌گیرد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Analyzing the case markers of Persian noun on Azerbayjani Turkish speakers’ speech, based on 4-M model

نویسنده [English]

  • abdolhossein heydari

Assistant Professor in farhangian

چکیده [English]

Analyzing the case markers of Persian noun in Azerbaijani speakers’ speech, based on 4-M model
Abstract
This paper attempted to study the case markers of Persian noun on Azerbaijani speakers’ speech, on the basis of 4-M model. Based on the understanding that in bilingual speech one of the languages is normally dominant over the other, Myers-Scotton (1993[1997]) formulated the Matrix Language Frame (MLF) model, in which she classified morphemes in complementizer phrases (CP) into two kinds: content morphemes, such as nouns and verbs, and system morphemes, such as inflections and most function words. A major difference between content morphemes and system morphemes is that most content morphemes either assign or receive thematic roles, while system morphemes do not.
The contact languages play different roles. The language with the dominant role, that is, the one that is used for the system morphemes, is called the matrix language (ML). The embedded language (EL) is the language from which content morphemes are inserted into the ML. The MLF model claims that in mixed ML + EL constituents, only the ML is used to build the frame. That is, the ML determines the morpho-syntax of ML + EL constituents. Modified versions of the model have since appeared (Myers-Scotton, 1997; Myers-Scotton, 2002; etc.), and the definitions of some terms of the MLF model have been elaborated or revised.
Extending the MLF model, a new morpheme categorization model called the 4-M model has been proposed (Myers-Scotton, 2002, 2006; Myers-Scotton & Jake, 2000). There are four categories of morphemes in the 4-M model, i.e. content morphemes and three types of system morphemes. This model is a refined version of the content vs. system morpheme opposition, and explains how different morphemes are accessed in different ways in speech production. The heart of the 4-M model is the fact that system morphemes are activated at two different abstract levels. They are classified as early and late. Furthermore, late system morphemes are divided into two types: bridges and outsiders. Early system morphemes are activated at the lemma level together with their content morpheme heads for their maximal projection. Levelt defines “lemma” as the “nonphonological part of an item’s lexical information.” He also states, “lemmas are the driving force behind the speaker’s construction of the surface structure. It is in the lemmas of the mental lexicon that conceptual information is linked to grammatical function” (1989, p.162). Unlike content morphemes and early system morphemes, late system morphemes depend on other types of information for their activation, and this information is only available at the level of the formulator, where language specific morpho-syntactic patterns must be realized. Information about all types of morphemes is present in lemmas, information about content morphemes and early system morphemes is salient at the conceptual level, and information about late system morphemes becomes salient at the positional level of the formulator. The model has been tested in many language contact situations with positive results. In some studies of language contact phenomena, these different system morpheme types have been shown to play different roles in language production. For example, in second language acquisition, early system morphemes are acquired first, and late system morphemes are more difficult to acquire. Of those few system morphemes occurring in mixed constituents in codeswitching, early system morphemes are most likely to appear in the EL (Myers-Scotton & Jake, 2000).
However, no paper has focused explicitly on Persian- Azerbaijani contact using the 4-M model. This paper attempts to do so. The research method of this study is descriptive-analytic. First, on the descriptive level, it characterizes the case markers of Persian noun in terms of their entries in the mental lexicon (i.e., lemmas). Evidence indicates that morpheme appearance order in receptive language would not be explained without characterization of morphemes themselves, and such a characterization depends on the formalization of a connection between the underlying abstract lexical entries in the mental lexicon and surface realizations. Second, the study goes beyond describing the nature of different types of morphemes to investigating the morpheme appearance order in receptive language. The data were collected from Azerbaijani resources and its speakers in Ardabil province. The case markers of Persian noun were classified into three types on the basis of 4-M: content morphemes (adposition), early system morphemes (vocative articles) and late bridge system morphemes (genitive marker). The data analyzing indicates some Persian vocative articles has been borrowed by Azerbaijani while some adpositions appear as code-switched elements in bilinguals’ speech and genitive marker lies between them. It seems there is a relation between different morpheme nature and their entering order to other language. Unlike system morphemes, content morphemes assigning theta roles are rarely borrowed by other languages. Early system morphemes are borrowed more easily than late system morphemes. Late system morphemes are activated later in the production process as required by the grammatical frame of the matrix language, while early system morphemes are indirectly elected at the same time that content morphemes are directly elected by the speaker’s intentions. This paper findings indicate 4-M model efficiency in explaining the order of morphemes appearance (as borrowed or code-switched) in receptive language.
Key words: Noun case markers, Persian, Azerbaijani, 4-M model

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Noun case markers
  • Persian
  • Azerbaijani
  • 4-M model