The Classification of Imperative Mood in Persian Language: Cognitive Linguistics Approach

Authors
Farzane Malaki arfaei 1
Hayat Ameri 2
Mojtaba Monshizadeh 3
Ferdos Aghagolzadeh 4
1 Department of Linguistics, Islamic Azad University،Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Center for Persian Language and Literature, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Department of Linguistics, Alameh Tabatabaei University, Tehran, Iran.
4 Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract
The present study deals with imperative mood in Persian language based on prototype theory which is one of sub-theories of the cognitive linguistics approach. The research hypotheses are based on distinctions between the form and meaning components in the imperative mood and its distribution in the language corpus of contemporary literature. The aim of this paper is to describe and classify the criterion of the imperative mood in different language levels and beyond.

According to the cognitive linguistics approach, language is part of a cognitive system and the syntactic structure of a language can't be studied separately, but all influential factors should be considered from different lingual aspects. The data analysis was carried out through descriptive and qualitative methods. It was found that the base of the verb has a high frequency in the corpus, but the form and meaning are different, with the meaning of imperative mood depending on the context. As a result, all language layers, forms and meanings in description and classification of the imperative mood should be taken into account to be analyzed cognitively.

Keywords

Subjects

[1] Abbasi, Zahra & Ferdos Aghagolzadeh, (2012). PhD Thesis, Tehran, Tabiat Modares University.
[2] Ahmad Giwi, H., (2001). Historical Grammar of Verb, Vol. 2, 1st Ed., Tehran, Qatreh Pubs.
[3] Akhlaghei, Ferial, PhD Thesis (1381), Tehran: Humanity Science Institute.
[4] Alexander, J., (1997). Longman English Grammar. London: Longman.
[5] Amouzadeh, M. and Tavangar, M. and Shahnaseri, (2012). Subjective modality in Persian and English parallel texts, in Subjectivity in Language and Discourse, Nicole Baumgarten, Inke Du Bois and Julian House (eds. PP. 245-266. East Sussex: Emerald Group Publishing.
[6] Biber, D.: Johnson, S.; Leech, G; Conrad, S.and Finegan, E., (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, London: Longman.
[7] B. Jensen, (2003). Imperatives in English and Scandinavian. PHD Thesis, University of Oxford.
[8] Croft, W. and D.Alan Cruse, (2004). Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[9] Crystal, J. (1991). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics 3th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.
[10] ……………., (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics 5th ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publisher.
[11] Cutrer, M.. (1994). Time and Tense in Narratives and Everyday Language. Doctoral dissertation, University of California at San Diego.
[12] Elkhanipour, Negin (2015). Adjective in Persian Language, Tehran” Markaz publication.
[13] Farshidvard, Kh., (2003). Today’s Extensive Grammar, Tehran: Sokhan Pubs.
[14] Halliday, M. A. K., (1984a). "Language as Code and language as Behavior: a Systemic .Functional Interpretation of the Nature and Ontogenesis of Dialogue", in: Halliday, M. A Halliday, M.A.K., (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Arnold.
[15] …………., (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd Edition). London: Arnold.
[16] Halliday, M. A. K. & Ch. Matthiessen, (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Edward Arnold.
[17] Hardie, R. G. (1990). English Grammar, London: Harper Collins.
[18] Hosseini, Amir, PhD dissertation (2007), Tehran: Humanity Science Institute.
[19] Lakoff, G. and H. Thompson (1975). “Introduction to Cognitive Grammar”. In Proceedings of the IST Annual Meeting of Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, CA: Berkeley Linguistics Society, Pp. 295-313.
[20] Lakoff, G. (1982).” Categories and Cognitive Modals”, Trier Series A. NO-96. Linguistics Agency University Trier.
[21] Langacker, Ronald, (1990). “Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar”. Cognitive Linguistics Research. No. 1. Berlin and Network: Manton de Grunter.
[22] …………………, (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Volume II. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
[23] …………………, (1999). “Grammar and Conceptualization”, in Cognitive Linguistics Research. 14. Berlin and Network: Manton de Grunter.
[24] ………………, (2006). “On the Continuous Debate about Discreteness”. In Cognitive Linguistics “. Vol.17. Pp. 107- 151.
[25] Li, Jian. (1999). Modality and Meaning of Modal Auxiliaries. Journal of Foreign Languages. 1999 (4): Pp.19-23.
[26] Mortelmans, Tanja, (2007), Modality in cognitive linguistics in Guyckens, H., & Dirk, G., The Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Routledge.
[27] Natel Khanlari, P., (1987). Persian Grammar, 8th Ed., Tehran: Novin Pubs.
[28] Palmer, F. R., (1986). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[29] Rosch, E., (1975). Cognitive Representations of Semantic Categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104(3), Pp. 665-233.
[30] Safavi, Korosh, (1380). Introduction on Semantics, Tehran: Islamic Art Institute.
[31] Talghani, Hojatallah, (2008). Aspect, Mood, Negation in Persian Language, Canada: Toronto University.
The International Journal of Humanities
Volume 24, Issue 1
January 2017
Pages 61-74