ساختمان بند التزامی بر پایه عملیات تطابق چامسکی

Due to the influence of the English language on the development of syntax, and because subjunctive constructions are poorly generated in English, such constructions have received relatively little attention in generative tradition. This is because English restricts these constructions to a few marginal cases, and instead, it relies predominantly on its bare infinitival constructions. This is while in finite and/or subjunctive languages like Persian, a productive use of these finite constructions are available. Accordingly, this study aims to investigate Persian finite subjunctive constructions and compares them with the relevant finite subjunctives in other languages. More specifically, the present analysis shows that the left-periphery elements of a Persian subjunctive clause are analyzed following (Rizzi, 1997) with respect to MoodP and CP and demonstrates that the syntactic structure of these subjunctive clause contains all features that make finiteness and/or subjunctive force possible. These include the embedded subjunctive TP (including ϕ-features), nominative Case/case of the embedded PRO, appearing within the subjunctive mood phrase (SbjvP), and the embedded clause is dominated by a CP with the overt complementizer ke, “that” constituting a non-phasal CP. As such, the Persian subjunctive clause bears a complete structural resemblance to the indicative clause and stands in stark contrast to the non-finite, bare infinitival constructions found in languages such as English. The study further shows that the ordering of the constituents within a subjunctive clause follows the same pattern proposed by (Oshima, 2003), and (Antonenko, 2010). Finally, using the Operation Agree (Chomsky, 2000; 2001), or more specifically Multiple Agree  (Hiraiwa, 2001; 2005), this analysis illustrates how the structure of a Persian subjunctive clause derives under the minimalist account, obviating the need for Move, and how these constructions highlight the need to reconsider formulation of Phase Impenetrability Condition (Chomsky, 2000; 2001) to include the non-phasal constructions like the subjunctives. 
Introduction
This study investigates the structure of finite subjunctive clauses in Persian, a language that, unlike English, lacks infinitival constructions altogether. Persian instead makes a productive use of finite subjunctives which appear in subordinate clauses, headed by the complementizer ke “that.” These subjunctives are semantically similar to non-indicative, subjunctive clauses in other languages like the Balkan languages (Oshima, 2003), Greek (Roussou, 2009), Italian (Alessandra, 2009), Serbian (Nikolić, 2020), Japanese (Oshima, 2003), and Russian (Antonenko, 2010), among many others.
Materials & Methods
The study mainly relies on native-speaker linguistic data, and acceptability judgments. Using core Minimalist accounts of Merge, Multiple Agree, Phase Theory, and the cartographic analyses of the left periphery, the research constructs derivations of subjunctive clauses.
Research findings
Persian subjunctives display a cluster of morpho-syntactic features that align them with finiteness as seen in the English and Persian juxtapositions.

Ali wanted to leave here.
Ali mi-xast ke      æz     inja   be-r-e.

Ali asp-want.pst comp from here  sbj-leave-3sg[1]
‘Ali wanted to leave here.’
Structurally, the finite subjunctive complementation can replace different types of constructions that appear in the non-finite infinitive constructions in other languages.

Ali sæy=kærd ke       æz   inja  be-r-e. (control constructions)

Ali try-pst.3sg comp from here sbj-leave-3sg
‘Ali tried to leave here.’

Ali bayæd (ke) æz    inja  be-r-e. (modals)

Ali must    comp from here sbj-leave-3sg
‘Ali must leave here.’

be=næzær=miræs-e ke Ali  æz    inja  be-r-e. (raising predicates)

seem-3sg                 comp Ali  from here sbj-leave-3sg
‘It seems that Ali will leave.’

æge Ali æz inja  be-r-e, … (conditionals)

if     Ali from here sbj-leave-3sg
‘If Ali leaves here, …’
Based on the constructions above, we propose the following properties of the finite subjunctives.

The Properties of the Persian Finite Subjunctive
Person and number: the embedded verb obligatorily carries agreement endings.
Tense: the verbal stem includes tense.
Finiteness: the clauses are classified as finite (Cowper, 2016).
Case: a structural Nominative case is available for embedded subject DPs, even with the empty category PRO (Pirooz, 2016; Landau, 2006; Sigurðsson, 2008).
Mood: the verb is marked with the subjunctive prefix be-.
CP: these clauses are introduced by the overt complementizer ke (Darzi, 2008; Pirooz, 2025; 2016; Ilkhanipour, 2014).

Therefore, Persian subjunctive clauses are instances of full finite CPs, resembling the (matrix) indicatives and licensing nominative Case/case (with no need for ECM). So, the following configuration is radically different from the bare non-finite infinitive configurations in English. Here is the clausal architecture.

The Clausal Architecture of Persian Finite Subjunctive

… [_CP ke [_SbjP be- [_TP DP_Nom. [_vP DP v-ϕ … ]]]]
Discussion of Results & Conclusion
As seen in the properties in (7) and the architecture in (8) above, Persian occupies the comprehensive end of the scale of finiteness, since it exhibits a full suite of properties related to the finiteness and subjunctives simultaneously.
Besides, the left periphery of Persian subjunctives, (8) above, follows the architectural structure of Rizzi (1997), hosting CP, MoodP, and TP, all above vP.
Within Agree-based syntax (Chomsky 2000, 2001), Persian subjunctives provide strong support for Multiple Agree (2005; Hiraiwa, 2001), where a full CP structure is projected, and the valuation of features differs between free and control subjunctives.
In free subjunctives, T is defective only with respect to tense. It is anaphoric to the temporal head in the matrix clause, but its φ-features are valued locally. Multiple Agree establishes a dependency between the embedded T and the matrix T for temporal anchoring.
In control subjunctives, the embedded T is doubly defective as it lacks both tense and φ-feature values. Multiple Agree must connect it both to matrix C/T (for tense) and to a controller (subject or object) for φ-features. This classifies control subjunctives into two categories of subject- and object-control.
In the subject-control environment, the embedded φ-features co-vary with the matrix subject in Spec-TP, yielding straightforward Agree seen in (3) above. In object-control, (9) below, the φ-features are valued by the matrix object inside vP, requiring the Agree chain to extend deeper into the matrix vP.

Ostad_i daneꭍjuyan_j ro    mæjbur kærd       ke      be-r-an_j     

teacher students       obj  force=made.3sg  comp sbj-go-3pl there
‘The teacher forced the students to go there.’
As the co-indexations show, the embedded verb receives third person plural ending from the matrix object DP.
 
 
 
[1]. Asp.: aspect; Pst.: past; Comp.: complementizer; Sbj.: Subjunctive; 3Sg.: Third person singular.