بررسی باهم‌آیی پیش‌فعل و همکرد«کردن» در فعل مرکب فارسی

این مقاله با هدف بررسی و تحلیل باهماییِ پیش‌فعل و همکرد «کردن» در فعل مرکب فارسی بر مبنای نظریه واژگان زایشی (پاستیوسکی، 1995) نگاشته شده است و می‌کوشد تا با بهره‌گیری از مفاهیم مطرح در این نظریه، علل معناییِ تاثیرگذار بر ترکیب و باهم‌آیی عناصر مذکور و محدودیت‌های حاکم بر آن را مورد بررسی قرار دهد. در این مسیر پس از طبقه‌بندی عناصر پیش‌فعلی ترکیب شده با همکردِ «کردن»، تلاش می‌کنیم به بررسی سهم معنایی آن در مجموعه داده‌های مورد تحلیل بپردازیم. از نتایج این تحلیل می‌توان به نقش و تاثیر اطلاعات رمزگذاری شده در سطوح چندگانه بازنمایی‌های واژگانی-معناییِ عناصر پیش‌فعل و همکرد «کردن» در باهمایی عناصر تشکیل‌دهنده فعل مرکب و محدودیت‌های حاکم بر آن اشاره کرد. روش این پژوهش، توصیفی-تحلیلی است. افعال مرکب مورد بررسی و معانی و مثال‌های مربوطه از فرهنگ بزرگ سخن (انوری، 1381) استخراج شده است.

Explanation for Cooccurrence of Preverbs and the Light verb “KARDAN” in Persian Complex Predicates

1. IntroductionIn addition to simple verbs, Persian employs a large number of complex predicates consisting of a preverbal element and a light verb. The preverbal element can be a noun, an adjective, an adverb or a preposition phrase, which combines with a verb to form a single syntactic predicate. Persian complex verbs have attracted some researchers (e.g. Folli, Harley & Karimi 2005, Karimi 1997; Karimi Doostan 1997; Megerdoomian 2001; Mohammad & Karimi 1992; VahediLangroudi 1996; ;). This paper aims to analyze cooccurrence of preverb and the light verb “KARDAN” in Persian compound verbs, based on the theory of Generative Lexicon (Pustejovsky, 1995) and to investigate how these two elements combine in the compound verbs made with this light verb.2. Theoretical FrameworkGenerative Lexicon (henceforth, GL) introduces a knowledge representation framework which offers a rich and expressive vocabulary for lexical information. GL is concerned with explaining the creative use of language. In GL, the lexicon is the key repository holding much of the information underlying this phenomenon. More specifically, however, it is the notion of a constantly evolving lexicon that GL attempts to emulate; this is in contrast to currently prevalent views of static lexicon design, where the set of contexts licensing the use of words is determined in advance, and there are no formal mechanisms offered for expanding this set. This theory of linguistic semantics focuses on the distributed nature of compositionality in natural language. Unlike purely verbbased approaches to compositionality, Generative Lexicon attempts to spread the semantic load across all constituents of the utterance .Following standard assumptions in GL, the computational resources available to a lexical item consist of the following four levels: a. Argument Structure (ARGSTR): specifying the number and nature of the arguments to a predicate.b. Event Structure (EVENTSTR): defining the event type of the expression and any subeventual structure it may have; with subevents.c. Quali Structure (QUALIASTR): a structural differentiation of the predicative force for a lexical item.The qualia structures are defined as the modes of explanation associated with a word or phrase in the language, and are defined as follows (Pustejovsky, 1991):•Formal : the basic category of which distinguishes the meaning of a word within a larger domain;•Constitutive: the relation between an object and its constituent parts;•Telic: the purpose or function of the object, if there is one;•Agentive: the factors involved in the object’s origins or “coming into being”.d. Lexical Typing Structure (Lexical Inheritance Structure):giving an explicit type for a word positioned within a type system for the language.A set of generative devices connect the four levels, providing for the compositional interpretation of words in context. These devices include: selective binding, type coercion, and cocomposition (Pustejovsky, 2007).3. MethodologyAmong the possible factors and characteristics, we will focus particularly on semantic factors. This study will show that the cooccurrence of preverbs and ‘KARDAN’ in Persian Complex Predicates is a function of their semantic information (such as information in qualia structure). In this regard, preverbs are firstly classified into predicative /non predicative. Non predicative preverbs in turn are divided into several subtypes: natural types, functional types and complex types. Cooccurrence of preverbs and the light verb “KARDAN” is then accounted for by applying generative devices (such as type coercion, and cocomposition) on the information encoded in the lexicalsemantic representations (such as qualia structure) of preverbs and “KARDAN”. The research is descriptiveanalytic. Studied compound verbs and meanings and examples are cited from Anvari (2002).4. Results and DiscussionThis analysis indicates that encoded information in multiple levels of the lexicalsemantic representations of preverbs and light verbs plays an important role in restricting their cooccurrence. It is argued that qualia have the necessary information to explain the lexical semantic relation between words and cooccurrence constraint. Exploiting the information encoded in the lexicalsemantic representations (in particular qualia structure), which consists of limited but necessary information to explain the lexical semantic relations and cooccurrence constraints, allows us to explain the cooccurrence of two elements of compound verb, based on the concepts of the theory.5. ConclusionStudying the cooccurrence of light verbs alongside the preverbs, shows the role of information encoded in the lexicalsemantic structures of preverbs and light verbs (including arguments types of predicative preverbs and aspectual characteristics of each light verb) in cooccurrence of light verbs with the preverbs.