Creative word formation in Persian language in comparison with the English language

Document Type : Grammar

Author

Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Golestan University, Gorgan, Iran

10.22091/jls.2023.9190.1482

Abstract

Word formation processes mean word formation methods in a language. Some researchers consider blending, acronyms and clipping as creative processes of word-making. While the meaning of creativity in this research is to make a creative link between two concepts to form a new words and as a result, the meaning of the word not transparency according to its morphemes. This review, based on the entries of a dictionary chief editor by Hasan Anvari shows that creative word- formation is used extensively in Persian language with different constructions such as derivation, Compounding and metaphorical expansion. Also the derivation in Persian is not completely matched with the definitions found in morphological theories whereas mostly based on the English language data. On the other hand, the number of derivational fixes that have the ability to create creative words, such as “ak” in Golle + ak (summit+suffix=piggy bank), or “i” in kashk+i (curd+ suffix= absurd).is different compared to some other languages. Also there are many different constructions of creative compounds in Persian language. Metaphorical extension in connection with what is referred to as semantic expansion in semantics is another type of word formation that is not limited to the use of words from one field in another field, for example, the use of words from the field of horse-riding to the field of driving and has a wider range in the Persian language. Therefore, creative word-making in various forms, figurative-derivative such as rood + e (river+suffix) means intestine, metonymy-derivative such as rooz+e (day+suffix=fasting), also combinations are divided into five categories, such as simile like sang+del (stone + heart= hard-hearted), metaphorical like āb+zir+kāh (water+under+straw=cunning), metonymical like namak+nashnās (salt+ignorant=ungrateful) and ironic like kāhane-kharāb (house+ destroyed= poor) and creative adjective like nāzok-del (thin+heart=touchy). Metaphorical extension like ānten (informer) is also used. With the variety of creative word-formation in Persian language, it deserves more attention in creating new words and considering the lack of simple verbs in Persian language, it has productivity to a large extent.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. ارکان، فائزه و تهمینه حیدرپور بیدگلی. (1399). صرف رویکردهای نظری و کاربرد آنها در تحلیل زبان فارسی. تهران: سمت.
  2. انوری، حسن. (1381). فرهنگ سخن. تهران: سخن.
  3. انوری، حسن. (1381). فرهنگ کنایات سخن. تهران: سخن.
  4. رضوی، مرضیه سادات و فریبا قطره. (1393). «فرایندهای واژه‌‌آفرینی در گونة گفتاری زبان فارسی». نشریه پژوهش زبان و ادبیات فارسی. شمارة 34. صص: 167-145.
  5. سامعی، حسین و دیگران. (1400). الگوی ساخت‌‌واژه در زبان فارسی. چاپ دوم. تهران: فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی.
  6. شقاقی، ویدا. (1389). مبانی صرف. چاپ چهارم. تهران: سمت. طباطبایی، علاءالدین. (1393). ترکیب در زبان فارسی. چاپ اول. تهران: کتاب بهار.
  7. فرشیدورد، خسرو. (1386). فرهنگ پیشوندها و پسوندهای زبان فارسی. چاپ اول. تهران: زوار.
  8. کریمی دوستان، غلامحسین و انیس وحید. (1392). «تحلیل معنایی کلمات مرکب اسم-اسم در زبان فارسی». نشریه پژوهش‌‌های زبان‌‌شناسی. سال پنجم. شماره 1. صص: 82-65.
  9. لی، دیوید. (1397). زبان شناسی شناختی: یک مقدمه. ترجمه جهانشاه میرزابیگی. چاپ اول. تهران: آگاه.
  10. ناتل خانلری، پرویز. (1377). تاریخ زبان فارسی. چاپ ششم. تهران: فرهنگ نشر نو.
  11. نجفی، ابوالحسن. (1387). «زبان فارسی در واژه‌‌سازی توانمند است». مجله مترجم. شمارة 47. صص: 143-140.
  12. نفیسی، سعید. (1344). در مکتب استاد. چاپ دوم. تهران: موسسه مطبوعاتی عطایی.
  13. Adams, V. (1976). An Introduction to Modern English Word Formation. London: Longman.
  14. Akmajian, A et al. (2010). Linguistics: An Introduction to language and Communication. 6th Edition. The MAT Press. Cambridge.
  15. Bauer, L. (2002). English Word-Formation. Cambridge University Press.
  16. Bauer, L. (2004). Morphological Productivity. Cambridge University Press.
  17. Benczes, R. (2006). Creative compounding in English. John Benjamin’s publishing Company.
  18. Booij, G. (2007). the Grammar of Words. Oxford University Press.
  19. Chomsky, N. (1975). the Logical Structure of Linguistic Theory. Plenum Press. New York.
  20. Haspelmath, M. (2002). Understanding Morphology. Oxford University Press.
  21. Jespersen, O. (1954). A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part VI: Morphology. London: Bradford and Dickens.
  22. Katamba, F & Stonham, J. (2006). Modern Linguistics: Morphology. England. Macmillan Press.
  23. Libben, G. et al. (2003). Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness. Brain and Language. Vol 84. Pp. 50–64.
  24. Lieber, R. (2009). Introducing Morphology. Cambridge University Press.
  25. Spencer, A. (1991). Morphological theory, An introduction to word structure in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
  26. Yule, G. (2010). the Study of Language. 4th edition. Cambridge University Press.
CAPTCHA Image