|
|
سلسلهمراتب نقشهای معنایی و روابط دستوری در زبان فارسی
|
|
|
|
|
نویسنده
|
میرزائی آزاده
|
منبع
|
جستارهاي زباني - 1400 - دوره : 12 - شماره : 6 - صفحه:567 -597
|
چکیده
|
نقشهای دستوریِ فعل لزوماً با نقشهای معنایی آن، تناظر یکبهیک ندارد. برخی زبانشناسان برای تعیین رابطۀ میان نقشهای معنایی و دستوری، از مفهوم »سلسهمراتب تلویحی « استفاده کردهاند. در این پژوهش که ماهیتی توصیفی دارد ابتدا براساس »پیکرۀ گزارههای معنایی زبان فارسی «، »پیکرۀ نقشهای معنایی زبان فارسی « و »پیکرۀ وابستگی نحوی زبان فارسی « که حجمی حدود سیهزار جمله و نیممیلیون کلمه دارند، سلسلهمراتب روابط معنایی برای نقشهای دستوریِ »فاعل «، »مفعول «، »متمم حرفاضافهای/ مفعول غیرصریح «، »مسند « و »تمیز « مشخص شده است. نتایج نشان میدهد که فاعل بهلحاظ معنایی بیشتر بهصورت »کنشگر « ظاهر میشود و پس از آن »پذیرا «، »تجربهگر « و »سبب « در رتبههای بعدی هستند؛ تمایلِ غالب مفعول برای حضور در جمله، بهصورت »پذیرا « و پس از آن به ترتیب، »نتیجه «، »دربارگی « و »پذیرنده « است؛ جایگاه متمم حرفاضافهای بیشتر با »مکان « پر میشود و پس از آن »پذیرا «، »پذیرنده « و »مقصد « در رتبههای بعدی هستند؛ و نهایتاً جایگاه مسند و تمیز، در میان نقشهای معنایی، عمدتاً با »نسبت « پر میشود. در گام بعدی، سلسلهمراتب روابط دستوری برای نقشهای معنایی، شامل »کنشگر «، »تجربهگر «، »سبب «، »پذیرا «، »محرک « و »نسبت « تعیین شده است. نتایج نشان میدهد که »فاعل « بیش از »مفعول « تمایل دارد که »کنشگر « و »تجربهگر « باشد؛ »فاعل « و بعد از آن »افزوده «، بالاترین تمایل را برای »سبب «بودن دارند. سهگانۀ حرف اضافه بیش از »فاعل « تمایل دارد که محرک باشد؛ »مفعول « و بعد از آن »فاعل « بیشترین تمایل را برای »پذیرا «بودن دارند و در نهایت »مسند « بیش از »تمیز « تمایل دارد که نقش »نسبت « را ایفا کند. علاوهبر تمایل غالبِ نقشهای معنایی، برخی از هموقوعیها جالبتوجه بودند که از جملۀ آنها میتوان به حضور »کنشگر « بهمنزلۀ افزوده، حضور »تجربهگر « در جایگاه مفعول و در مقابل آن حضور »محرک « در جایگاه فاعل اشاره کرد.
|
کلیدواژه
|
سلسلهمراتب تلویحی، سلسلهمراتب نقشهای معنایی، کنشگر، فاعل دستوری، زبان فارسی.
|
آدرس
|
دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی, ایران
|
پست الکترونیکی
|
azadeh.mirzaei@atu.ac.ir
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thematic and Grammatical Hierarchies in Persian Language
|
|
|
Authors
|
Mirzaei Azadeh
|
Abstract
|
There is no onetoone correspondence between semantic roles and grammatical relations. Based on the concept of implicational hierarchy, some linguists have attempted to identify the relationship between grammatical relations and thematic roles. In this descriptive research, based on the Persian Proposition bank, Semantic Role Corpus in the Persian Language, and Persian Syntactic Dependency Treebank, the semantic hierarchy for different grammatical relations like subject, direct object, indirect object, subject complement and object complement have been explored in the one hand and also the grammatical hierarchy for different thematic roles like agent, experiencer, cause, theme, stimulus, attribute have been considered on the other hand. The syntactic and semantic corpora above consist of approximately 30,000 sentences and about half a million tokens. Observations showed that in the Persian language, among different kinds of semantic roles, the first candidate to be the subject is the agent followed by the theme, experiencer and cause. For the object position, the theme outranks the result which in turn outranks the topic and the recipient. In the direct object position, the most frequent role is the location followed by theme, recipient and destination; and finally, in the subject and object complement position, the attribute is the most frequent role among the other thematic roles in the sentences. On the grammatical hierarchy for thematic roles, subject outranks the object, as the agent and the experiencer; subject outranks the adjunct as the cause; triple preposition outranks the subject as the stimulus; object outranks the subject as the theme, and finally, the subject complement outranks the subject complement as the attribute. Apart from this dominant tendency, this research showed that there are other remarkable correlations between syntactic and semantic arguments; for example, the agent in addition to subject position can be placed in the direct object, indirect object, and even in the adjunct position. The appearance of experiencer in object position and stimulus in subject position is the other remarkable result.1. IntroductionGrammatical relations do not necessarily correspond to the specific semantic roles. For example, although the subject usually tends to be agent, datadriven studies show that the other thematic roles like theme, experiencer or cause tend to be in the subject position too. In this study, we sought to answer these two questions; what the relationship between the hierarchy of semantic roles and grammatical relations is? And what the thematic and grammatical hierarchies in the Persian language are? This study hypothesizes that Persian native speakers usually place agent, patient, recipient, and attribute respectively into the subject, object, prepositional object, object complement, and subject complement position. 2. Literature ReviewBased on the concept of grammatical hierarchy, Fillmore (1968), Jackandoff (1972), Comrie (1981), Givon (1984), Kroft (1990), Dowty 1991, Saeed (2003), and some other linguists have shown the relationship between semantic roles and grammatical relations in different ways. Fillmore (1968) states that not all semantic roles appear equally in the subject position. It seems that there is a tendency for the actor to be the subject than the instrument. Among the instrument and the receptive, the instrument more likely appears in the subject position. Saeed (2003: 155) constructs the subject hierarchy as below:AGENT>RECIPIENT/BENEFACTIVE>THEME/PATIENT>INSTRUMENT>LOCATIONIn the Persian language, some studies have separately concentrated on semantic roles, grammatical relations, or grammatical hierarchies. For example, Farrokhi Rad (2007), Mirzaei Moloodi (2014), and Alizadeh Rezghi (2015) have studied thematic roles in the Persian language. Bahrami (2014) and Bahrami (2017) have explored the animacy hierarchy and definiteness hierarchy. Gholipour (2018) has studied some thematic roles in identical syntactic valency structures of Persian verbs.3. MethodologyTo achieve the hierarchy of grammatical relations and semantic roles in Persian language and to examine the hypotheses of this research, we used the Persian proposition Bank (Mirzaei Moloodi: 2016), Semantic Role Corpus in Persian Language (Mirzaei and Moloudi, 2015), and Persian syntactic dependency treebank (Rasooli et al., 2013). These corpora, which have the same content, consist of approximately 30,000 sentences. The two first were annotated whit the predicateargument information and the third with syntactic annotations in addition to morphosyntactic features.In the present study, in order to investigate the correspondences between the semantic roles of the verbs and grammatical relations, at first, the semantic correlations of grammatical relations including subject, object, the prepositional object, subject complement, and object complement have been considered. Then the syntactic correlations of semantic roles including agent, experiencer, cause, theme, stimulus, and attribute have been explored. 4. ResultsAs shown in Table 1, findings indicated that among different semantic roles, the first candidate that tends to be the subject is the agent followed by the theme, experiencer and cause. For the object position, the theme outranks the result which in turn outranks the topic and the recipient. In the direct object position, the most frequent role is the location followed by theme, recipient and destination; and finally, in the subject and object complement position, the attribute is the most frequent role among the other thematic roles in the sentences. Table 1grammatical relations and equivalent semantic roles first thematic role frequencysecond thematic role frequencythird thematic role frequencyforth thematic role frequencySubjectagent14440theme9985experiencer3145 cause1409Objecttheme1343result1093topic564recipient372 Prepositional objectlocation1680theme1463recipient1084destination644Subject complementattribute3875 the other roles< 100 Object complementattribute692the other roles< 100 On the grammatical hierarchy for thematic roles, as shown in Table 2, the subject, object, adjunct, and prepositional object respectively tend to be the agent. This hierarchy is different for the cause, in that subject tends to be in the first position and then adjunct, triple preposition, and subject complement. For the experiencer, stimulus, theme and attribute, the grammatical hierarchy respectively is as below:experiencer: subject> object> triple preposition> subject complementstimulus: triple preposition> subject> complement clause> objecttheme: object > subject> triple preposition> complement clauseattribute: subject complement> object complement> subject> complement clause Table 2semantic roles and equivalent grammatical relations agentsubject14440object214adjunct221prepositional object62causesubject1409adjunct99* triple preposition44subject complement27experiencer subject3145object348triple preposition92subject complement29stimulustriple preposition615subject218complement clause110Object63themeobject13430subject9985triple preposition6006complement clause3205attributesubject complement3875object complement692subject152complement clause74* object complement, prepositional complement of noun and prepositional complement of adjective are introduced as the triple preposition. 5. ConclusionAccording to Dowty 1991, the best theory for describing the argument selection will be one that involves just two roles named ProtoAgent and ProtoPatient. ProtoAgent includes agent, causer, experiencer as the roles that they have volitional involvement in the event or state, causes an event or change of state in another participant, moves relative to the position of another participant, internally causes the event or state.The concept of ProtoPatient also includes that role which undergoes a change of state, is causally affected by another participant, is stationary relative to the movement of another participant, or is subject of an external causeThis study showed that the subject as a relational meaning in the Persian language is equal to the concept of ProtoAgent as a thematic role. The object also is nearly equal to the concept of ProtoPatient as a thematic role.Additionally in this study, the semantic hierarchy for different grammatical relations like subject, direct object, indirect object, subject complement, and object complement have been explored on the one hand and also the syntactic hierarchy for different thematic roles like agent, experiencer, cause, theme, stimulus, attribute have been considered on the other hand.
|
Keywords
|
Implicational hierarchy ,thematic hierarchy ,agent ,grammatical subject ,Persian language
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|