HAVE-progressive in Modern Persian: A Case of Pattern Replication?

ConCALL, October 7-9, 2016

Narges Nematollahi, Indiana University

Present progressive

Past progressive

dāšt-im šām mi-khord-imhad-1PL dinner IMPFV-ate-1PL

We were eating dinner.

ādam-hā dār-and mi-āy-andperson-PL have-3PL IMPFV-come-3PL

People are coming.

First reports on HAVE-progressive• Zhukovski (1888) mentions two forms: in Tehrani dialect/standard

variety (dār-e mi-raqs-e) and in a dialect near Isfahan (dāru yue)

• Mihraban and Browne (1897) record two forms: in the Gabri dialect (dor-en o čar-en) and in the standard variety (dār-and mi-čar-and)

• First attestation in literary works: 1907 in satirical essays of a newspaper (dār-and mi-āy-and) and (dāštand mi-āvardand)

Semantic/syntactic peculiarities of HAVE-progressive

• Bybee et al. (1994)’s study of progressive in various language families: no language uses ‘have’ to mark the progressive aspect English: auxiliary BE + gerundFrench: (optionally) en train de ‘in the process of’ + infinitiveItalian: (optionally) the auxiliary STAND + gerundTajik: the auxiliary STAND + gerundDari: da hål-e “in the act of” + infinitive

• Both the auxiliary and the main verb are fully conjugated

Three proposals for the origin of HAVE-progressive

• Pistoso (1974), Shokri (2015): borrowing from the Māzandarānilanguage : der-me kem-me “I am doing”

• Jeremias (1993): periphrastic constructions with HAVE in classical Persian which mark the perfect tenses

• Nematollahi (2014): Serial Verb Constructions in colloquial Persian with the verb bar dāštan ‘to set off’

Three proposals for the origin of HAVE-progressive

• Pistoso (1974), Shokri (2015): borrowing from the Māzandarānilanguage : der-me kem-me “I am doing” CONTACT-INDUCED

• Jeremias (1993): periphrastic constructions with HAVE in classical Persian which mark the perfect tenses INTERNAL

• Nematollahi (2014): Serial Verb Constructions in colloquial Persian with the verb bar dāštan ‘to set off’ INTERNAL

Borrowing from the Mazandarani language into the Standard variety

Purpose of this study:

• To elaborate the first proposal (the northern influence hypothesis) in the light of recent theories in contact linguistics, particularly the model of pivot-matching in (Matres & Sakel 2007)

• To Identify the strengths and weaknesses of the hypothesis

Progressive aspect in Iranian dialects/languages

Source of data: Descriptive Dictionary of Linguistic Varieties in Iran (Kalbāsī 2009) 143 dialects/languages

Typology of Iranian Languages (Dabīr Muqaddam 2013)16 languages/group of languages

Eight different strategies to mark the progressive1- No distinct morphology2- use of fixed words like xærɪk ‘busy’ + the infinitive of the main verb...7- HAVE-progressive (in Persian and its varieties as well as in many other dialects)8- BE-progressive / LOCATIVE BE-progressive (in certain dialects spoken in central Iran and in Māzandarāni dialects)

BE-progressive in Aftari (Central dialects)

LOCATIVE BE-progressive in Soleyman Abadi (Māzandarāni dialects)

“I was telling my child”

1) hoštun vače de da bošt-i mi-vāt=amoneself child to was-1SG IMPFV-said=1SG

2) dā bā-m mi vače-ye got-om(loc)was-1SG my child said-1SG

Aftari (Central dialect)

Soleyman Abadi (Māzandarāni dialects)

“Where is my child?”

mon vače kojā dar-a ?my child where is-3SG

mi vače kojār dar-e ?my child where (loc)is-3SG

Progressive paradigm in a Māzandarāni dialect

Present PastSingular Plural Singular Plural

1st dar-eme kār-me dar-emi kār-me day-me kāšt-eme day-mi kāšt-emi

2nd dar-i kār-ni dar-eni kār-neni day kāšti day-ni kāšt-eni

3rd dar-e kār-ne dar-ene kār-nene day-ye kāšt-e day-ne kāšt-ene

Pattern replication in (Matres & Sakel 2007)

1- The bilingual identifies a pivotal feature of the model construction in the Model Language (ML)

2- He looks for an appropriate matching construction in the Replica Language (RL), based on

- Semantic similarities (MOST ACTIVE FORCE)- Morphosyntactic similarities - Phonological similarities (MARGINAL, yet “attested in the pivot-

matching processes”)

PAT in the northern influence hypothesis1- Some bilinguals of the northern language (Model language=ML) and Persian (Replica language=RL) started to replicate the progressive construction of ML in RL.

2- They re-analyze the auxiliary dar- in ML as dār- in RL (phonological similarity)

locative-be progressive in ML ----> have-progressive in RL

3- Have-progressive in RL was taken on by monolinguals of Persian and was extended to past tense too.

Hypothesis: HAVE-progressive as the result of PATMazandarani Persian

(1) Pattern Replication (2) Extension of the replicated form to the past tense

Some doubts about the hypothesis:

- The probability of borrowing from a smaller, local language into themore widespread and dominant national language

- Diachronic data

Alternative HypothesisPersian Mazandarani

Diachronic data- A selection of poems of Amir Pāzvāri, written probably in the 17th

century, does not show any case of periphrastic progressive forms

- In a Māzandarāni text written in 1889: two cases of progressive forms (Borjian 2008)present progressive form with ‘locative be’: dar-ə mir-nə ‘he is dying’ past progressive form with ‘have’: dāšt-ə ši-ə ‘he was going’

Alternative HypothesisPersian Mazandarani

Northern influence hypothesis vs. alternative hypothesis

• Northern influence hypothesis is more typologically sound: many languages use ‘(locative)-be’ as their progressive auxiliary.No language uses ‘have’.

• Alternative hypothesis is more sound in terms of, social positions of Persian and Māzandarāni language,the diachronic data.