چكيده لاتين :
1- Introduction
The notion that a proposition has a fundamentally bipartite structure derives ultimately from Aristotle. By hypothesis, expletives contribute nothing to the semantics and receive no theta role. Therefore, expletive subjects constitute perhaps the best argument that this requirement that propositions must be built from a subject and a predicate, is syntactic rather than semantic. Previous work on pro-drop languages identified a set of parametric values associated with the availability of null subjects, including the presence of null expletive subjects. In the same vein, but more within the framework of Minimalist Program, we will discuss the fact that referential subjects may optionally be overt or covert in Persian, while expletives are obligatorily null. In this regard, a covert pronoun expletive will be claimed to have merged in the surface subject position of all zero-place predicates and some unaccusative structures where the internal argument is a PP or CP, satisfying the EPP feature - a requirement forcing some DP to appear in the specifier of the clausal head. This analysis is empirically supported by a number of facts arguing against the idea that pronoun in (this) can freely appear as an expletive subject in Persian.
2- Theoretical Framework
The Minimalist approach is a research program that attempts to define an optimal design for human language by postulating only those assumptions minimally required on conceptual grounds. These assumptions include a grammar that generates Logical Form (LF) and Phonetic Form (PF) pairs for all sentences. These pairs are compiled from the feature sets of lexical items by an optimal computational system and must have the morphosyntactic features of all lexical elements checked at the interfaces for appropriate interpretability. The features which relate sound and meaning come in binary divisions; they can be interpretable or uninterpretable, and weak or strong. The property of interpretability, generally used as the driving force behind the establishment of syntactic dependency in the minimalist system, is supposed to play a central role in the syntactic computation to drive the transition into the interpretive LF component. The idea is that uninterpretability forces feature matching and as a result, any uninterpretable feature which has been matched will be deleted. To put it more concretely, unlike interpretable features which have an effect on semantic interpretation and can participate in more than one checking operation, the uninterpretable ones must be eliminated before they reach LF; otherwise, Full Interpretation will be violated. In addition to having the property of interpretability, features also have a second property, known as strength. Strong features must be checked before the grammar splits; indeed, if any strong feature is left unchecked before Spell-Out, the derivation crashes at PF. To sum up, the feature strength is used to ensure locality between two features (that is, to trigger movement).
3- Methodology
In line with what holds for feature checking introduced in the previous section, we examined the properties of expletives within the Minimalist framework. An expletive is an element that may fill the surface subject position but does not receive theta role from the predicate. For both theoretical and empirical grounds, first we need to investigate the properties of expletives in a language, say English. English has two types of expletives: existential expletive (there) and expletive pronoun (it). While both expletives are place holders for the subject, the configurations where there and it are licensed are different due to their different feature composition. More specifically, the expletive there is lexically specified as having a categorial D-feature, but no Case- or phi-features, whereas the expletive it is fully specified with categorial, Case, and phi-features. However, the there-expletive structures are not of concern here, since we are merely going to study expletive pronoun in Persian syntactic structures. These sketchy considerations suffice to show the considerable theoretical and empirical potential of the topic we are investigating.
4- Results &Discussion
Persian is a Null-subject, verb final language that exhibits an SOV order in the unmarked order, except clausal arguments that occur post-verbally. Previous work on null subject languages identified a set of parametric values associated with the availability of null subjects. Some features initially discussed for Romance null subject languages such as Italian or Spanish are: (a) null subjects, (b) free verb-subject (c) absence of that-trace effects, and (d) the availability of null expletive subjects.
Whether or not there is an expletive construction in Persian has been highly controversial. Some linguists believe that overt and covert expletives exist in this language. However, some others have argued that there are no overt or covert expletives in Persian, and that the Spec of TP is not obligatorily filled.
In this study we will draw on the fact that while referential subjects may optionally be overt or covert in Persian, expletives are obligatorily null. In this regard, a covert pronoun expletive will be claimed to have merged in the surface subject position of all zero-place predicates (1a) and some unaccusative structures (1b) where the internal argument is a PP or CP, satisfying the EPP feature - a requirement forcing some DP to appear in the specifier of the clausal head:
1. (a). da’v? ?od.
quarrel became-3Sg.
“The quarrel began.”
(b). az ?nh? hem?yat ?od.
from them support became-3Sg.
“They were supported.”
(c). ?nh? hem?yat ?od-and
they support became-3Pl.
“They were supported.”
In (1a), da’v? (quarrel) is the non-verbal element (NV) of a zero-place predicate and ?od (became) is its light verb (LV). Since there is no internal or external argument, an expletive pronoun must be merged in the surface subject position to satisfy structural requirements of the derivation, including EPP and case feature. In (1b), in contrast to (1c), the internal argument is a preposition phrase. On the one hand this constituent is not subject to the Case Filter (i.e. it doesn’t need case checking), and on the other hand it cannot check the EPP feature of the clausal head due to its phrasal category. So, a subject expletive which agrees with the LV in phi-features has to be inserted in the Spec, TP. This analysis is empirically supported by a number of facts arguing against the idea that pronoun in (this) can freely appear as an expletive subject; subject-verb agreement is one of the most important ones to prove this fact:
2. (a). in Ali bud ke u r? did.
this Ali was that him acc. saw-3Sg.
“It was Ali that saw him.”
(b). in ma budim ke u r? did-im
in we were that him acc. saw-1Pl.
“It was us that saw him.”
The contrast between (2a) and (2b) shows that the pronounin (this) cannot be treated as a subject expletive, since it is “Ali/ we” that agrees with the following verbs in the matrix and embedded clauses.
5- Conclusions& Suggestions
The present study shows that while referential subjects may optionally be overt or covert in Persian, expletives are obligatorily null. This covert expletive has the following properties:
A. It is fully specified with categorial, Case, and phi-features.
B. It appears with zero-place predicates and some unaccusative structures where the internal argument is a PP or CP.
Suggestion: The existence of a null existential expletive in Persian could also be investigated.
Key Words: Expletive pronoun, Pro-drop, Extended Projection Principle, Zero-place predicate, Unaccusative predicate.
References(In Persian)
Haghbin, F.,& Fashandaki, S. (2011). Persian and pronoun expletive. Pazhuhesh-haye Zaban va Adabiyate Tatbighi,2(1), 87-101.
Darzi, A., & Rezayi, S. T. (2010). Expletive in Persian. Pazhuhesh-haye Zabanshenasi. 2(2), 57-73.
Sahrayi, R., & Kazemi-Nahad, R. (2006). On passive structure in modern Persian. Majalle-ye Daneshkade-ye Adabiyat va Olume Ensani, 20(17), 77-97.
References(In English)
Adger, D. (2003). Core syntax, a minimalist approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Belletti, A. (1988). The case of unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 1–34.
Boeckx, C. (2000). EPP eliminated.ms., University of Connecticut: Storrs.
Burzio, L. (1986). Italian syntax. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Chomsky, N. (1977). Essays on form and interpretation. NY: North-Holland.
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris
Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist program. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Cinque, G. (1999). Adverbs and functional heads, a cross-linguistic perspective. NY: Oxford University Press.
Darzi, A. (2008).On the vP analysis of Persian finite control constructions. Linguistic Inquiry, 39(1),103-116.
Darzi, A. (1996).Word order, NP movement, and opacity conditions in Persian. Unpublished, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA.
Emonds, J. (2006). Adjectival passives: The construction in the Iron Mask. In M. Everaert, & H. V. Riemsdijk (Eds.),The blackwell companion to syntax(Vol. I, pp. 16-60). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Haegeman, L. (1995). The syntax of negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Haegeman, L. (1994). Introduction to government & binding theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
Heycock, C. (2013). The syntax of predication. In M. D. Dikken (Ed.),The cambridge handbook of generative syntax(pp. 322-352). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hornstein, N. (2000). Existentials, A-chains, and reconstruction. DELTA,16, 45–79.
Hornstein, N., Nunes, J., & Grohmann, K. K. (2005). Understanding minimalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Karimi, S. (2005). A minimalist approach to scrambling: Evidence from Persian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Marantz, A. (1995). A reader’s guide to a minimalist program for linguistic theory. In G. Webelhuth (Ed.),The principles and parameters approach to syntactic theory: A synopsis(pp. 88-108).Oxford: Blackwell.
Moro, A. (2006). Existential sentences and expletive there. In M. Everaert, & H. V. Riemsdijk (Eds.),The blackwell companion to syntax(Vol. II, pp. 210-236). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Radford, A. (2009). Analysing English sentences, a minimalist approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rizzi, L. (1986). Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry,17, 501-557.
Sanchez, L. (2010). The morphology and syntax of topic and focus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Svenonius, P. (2002). Subjects, expletives, and the EPP. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taleghani, A.H. (2008). Modality, aspect and negation in Persian. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
