The paper looks at constraints on non-wh relatives in Sorani Kurdish (Iranian) and English (Germanic). We argue that some of them are grammatical, whereas others introduce social meaning. We present a basic, lexicalist syntactic analysis and expand it with social meaning constraints. We propose that classical sociolinguistic variables have the status of conventional implicatures and the overall assessment of a style is treated as a particularized conversational implicature.
Our study aims at ascertaining and formulating a framework that would account for the Kurdish data. We scrutinize all the dyads that occur in the selected corpus, and describe how they usually work on the basis of the two following variables: power and intimacy. According to our investigation, the use of terms of address in Kurdish is affected by the age, sex, occupation, ideology, political and social position of the interlocutors which can be stated as a result of the investigation of older material-such as qualitative analysis of observation followed by unobtrusive note taking of contemporary use, a corpus of several plays, accounts of travel, interviews, TV, radio and the careful observation of the use of terms of address of today. Kurdish culture is title + first-name and title + family name oriented. Titles like 'doctor,' 'professor,' and 'teacher' are used, with title and family names. First names in Kurdish culture are restricted in use. They are used most commonly among peer groups of young generation, and by an older person addressing a child or a younger person in the family.
This article provides a comparative overview of phonological and phonetic differences of Mukrī Kurdish varieties and their geographical distribution. Based on the examined data, four distinct varieties can be distinguished. In each variety area, different phonological patterns are analyzed according to age, gender, and social groups in order to establish cross-regional and cross-generational developments in relation to specific phonological distributions and shifts. The variety regions which are examined in the present article include West Mukrī (representing an archaic form of Mukrī), Central Mukrī (representing a linguistically peripheral dialect), East Mukrī (representing mixed archaic and peripheral dialect features), and South Mukrī (sharing features of both Mukrī and Ardałānī). The study concludes that variation in the Mukrīyān region depends on phonological developments, which in turn are due to geographical and sociological factors. Moreover, contact-induced change and internal language development are also established as triggering factors distinguishing regional variants.
This study applies a corpus-based quantitative approach to the word order typology and linguistic theories about word order in several genetically unrelated language varieties in northwestern Iran, such as Mukri Kurdish, Northeastern Kurdish and Armenian (Indo-European), Jewish Neo-Aramaic (Semitic), and Azeri Turkic (Turkish). Despite the difference in the default position of the direct object, the existing corpora of published and personal field data of narrative free speech demonstrate that these languages share the clause-final position of Targets predominantly (e.g., physical and metaphorical goals, recipients, addressees, and resultant-states) in their word order. Yet, Targets are more flexible in Mukri Kurdish, Northeastern Neo-Aramaic, and Azeri Turkic, whereas they are less flexible in Armenian and Northeastern Kurdish. Among various factors relevant to the placement of Targets, morphosyntactic features such as parts of speech exhibit constraints and clear preferences in the pre- and postverbal placement of Targets.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.