Persian Complex DPs: How Mysterious Are They?

Abstract

Persian complex DPs exhibit structural peculiarities with respect to the placement of the object marker for specific DPs and the position of embedded CPs. This article discusses these peculiarities as well as the internal structure of Persian complex DPs and the distribution of clitic pronouns in this language. It is argued that a base generation approach accounts more adequately for Persian and other languages that exhibit the following properties: lack of a wh-relative pronoun, presence of an invariant relative complementizer, and alternation between a gap and a pronoun representing the relativized head. Regarding the postverbal position of the embedded CP, it is argued that extraposition and VP-remnant face theoretical and empirical problems, while V-raising and XP movement, as instances of scrambling triggered by focus in this language, provide an adequate explanation for Persian data.

Plural marking, indefiniteness, and the noun phrase

“…While uniting indefinite and relative uses of ±i is highly desirable in the interests of elegance and simplicity, this seems to lead to the view that the same morpheme can function both as an indefinite marker under Q 0 and as a definite determiner under D 0 (cf. Karimi 2001). It remains to be seen whether such a seemingly contradictory view can be maintained.…”

Constraint cumulativity and gradience: Wh-scrambling in Persian

“…He does not pay attention to the fact that the postverbal element is an adjunct clause. They behave differently from phrasal adjuncts which are unmarked in preverbal position as in (ii), while being marked in postverbal position (see Karimi, 2001Karimi, , 2005 former are more context-dependent than the latter. 36 The displaceable property of Persian wh-adjuncts also relates to the fact that they are quantificational.…”

An Investigation of the Learnability of Relative Clauses by EFL Learners

“…The Persian relative construction is different from its English counterpart in three ways (Karimi, 2001). First, there is a relative particle -iattached to the head noun in Persian, as in (a).…”

“…In English, relative pronoun is variant, which always precedes relative clause and follows the head noun phrase, in contrast, Persian relative marker 'ke' is invariant and follows the head noun (Karimi, 2001;Taghvaipour, 2005), as the following example (1) shows. (head noun) (relative marker) English relative pronoun is characterized by Paris (1976) as morphemes which stand for nouns and vary morphologically in accordance with the function of the noun which is relativized in the relative clause.…”

“…However, Persian relative clause do not contain relative pronoun, but use an invariant relative marker 'ke'. In addition, the use of relative marker is obligatory (Karimi, 2001;Taghvaipour, 2005), not optional as English relative clauses are, as example shows:…”