رده شناسی ترتیب واژه ها در زبان خانیکی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
هدف اصلی از نگارش این مقاله، به دست دادن توصیفی از دستور زبان خانیکی بر پایه داده های تجربی است. این گونه زبانی متعلق به شاخه غربی جنوبی زبان های ایرانی است. این زبان مانند بسیاری از دیگر زبان های بومی ایران در خطر نابودی است. این زبان در روستای خانیک، که گویشوران آن را خونک [xunek] تلفظ می کنند، گفت وگو می شود. در این مقاله، توصیف مؤلفه های رده شناختی ترتیب واژه ها بر مبنای مقاله درایر (1992) با در نظر گرفتن مؤلفه های بیست و چهارگانه جفت های همبسته صورت گرفته است. بررسی و تحلیل داده های زبانی این مطالعه مبتنی بر داده های صوتی جمع آوری شده از گفتار طبیعی دو فرد کهنسال و بی سواد این روستا یک گویشور مرد 92 ساله و یک گویشور زن 90 ساله است. برای گردآوری داده ها از روش میدانی همچون مشاهده و مصاحبه حضوری استفاده شده است. حجم این داده ها بیش از 60 دقیقه است و بالغ بر 500 پاره گفتار از این داده های صوتی، توسط نگارندگان آوانگاری شده و تقطیع صرفی، نحوی و معنایی تمام جملات ثبت شده است. در نهایت توصیف و تحلیل داده ها در چارچوب نظری برگزیده انجام یافته است. از آن جایی که یکی از نگارندگان این مقاله خود گویشور این زبان است و از شم زبانی و توانش در این زبان برخوردار است، جمع آوری داده ها با دقت بالایی صورت گرفته است. فایل های صوتی تمام مثال ها برای پژوهش های آتی در زمینه آواشناسی و تحلیل های دقیق تر واجی موجود هستند. به لحاظ ترتیب سازه ها، داده های این تحقیق حاکی از آن بود که زبان خانیکی دارای 12 مؤلفه از مؤلفه های فعل پایانی قوی و 18 مؤلفه از مؤلفه های فعل میانی قوی در مقایسه با گروه زبان های اروپا-آسیا می باشد. این زبان همچنین دارای 15 مؤلفه فعل پایانی قوی و 20 مؤلفه فعل میانی قوی در مقایسه با گروه زبان های جهان بود. بنابراین زبان خانیکی هم در مقایسه با زبان های اروپا-آسیا هم در مقایسه با زبان های جهان بیش تر دارای مؤلفه های زبان های فعل میانی قوی است. این زبان مانند بسیاری دیگر از زبان های ایرانی دارای رده آمیخته است و این موضوع را که رده آمیخته خود یک رده است بیش تر تقویت می کند.The Typology of Word order in Khaniki Language
Introduction
In this paper, the description of word order typological parameters has been provided based on the 24 correlation pairs of Dryer (1992) and in line with the Typology of Iranian Languages (Dabir-Moghaddam, 1392). This variant belongs to South-Western Iranian languages. This language is spoken in the village [xɑnik], locally called [xunek]. The village [xɑnik] is located 25 kilometers from Gonabad on the border of Razavi and South Khorasan provincesand it is one of the many Khaniks in the Southern Khorasan and it is surrounded by mountains. Khanik is inside a valley. It is settled in a valley all surrounded by a mountainous area called [siyæh koh] which means Black Mountain . The Black Mountains has been intersected by this valley. Numerous small valleys end up in this valley and every each of these valleys has one to five springs of water. In total, there are almost 38 springs of water in this valley. According to Health Ministry of Gonabad, it has the population of 196 people, mainly old people. Rate of birth is zero. There are only 4 students. The youngest person is 7 and the oldest man and woman are 94 and 95 respectively. Consequently, it is an endangered language.
Methodology, literature and the objective
The data in this study has been collected through recording the voice of old and illiterate people in the village. Then the audio data was segmented and morphemic and interlinear glosses were provided with all the examples. And finally the description and explanation of the data were provided in the adapted theoretical framework. The description of word order typological parameters has been provided based on the 24 correlation pairs of Dryer (1992) mentioned in his article Greenbergian word order correlations . In order to provide an explanation for the existence of the pairs of X and Y on the level of NPs and Clauses and their correlations with OV and VO types, Dryer (1992) introduces HDT and HTC theories. However, he finally provides the Branching Direction Theory (BDT) as an alternative to these theories. According to BDT verb patterners are phrasal (branching) categories. That is, a pair of elements X and Y will employ the order XY significantly more often among VO languages than among OV languages if and only if X is a nonphrasal category and Y is a phrasal category (Dryer, 1992: 109).
Discussion
The 24 parameters of word order mentioned in Dryer (1992) and his Branching Direction Theory (BDT) and their correlations with the occurrence of object and verb in Khaniki language has been analyzed intensively in this part and the result is as follows.
Khaniki is a strong verb-final and verb-initial language in the World genera and EURASIAN language genera in parameters 10, 11, 16, 17, 23.
In the parameters 4, 5, 12, 18 in the World genera and EURASIAN genera, Khaniki has all the 4 possibilities.
In the parameters 6, 7, 22 in the World and EURASIAN genera, Khaniki is a weak verb-initial language but a strong verb-final.
In the parameters 1, 3, 8, 13, 14, 20, 21, 24 in the World and EURASIAN genera, Khaniki is a strong verb-initial language but a weak verb-final.
In the parameters 2, 9, 15, 19 Khaniki does not behave as a uniform language in regard to typological parameters in the two types of verb-final and verb-initial languages in both genera. For example, in parameter 2, it is a weak verb-initial and verb-final in EURASIAN genera but a strong verb-initial and verb-final in the World genera. In parameter 9, it is a strong verb-initial and weak verb-final in EURASIAN genera but a strong verb-initial and verb-final in the World genera. In parameter 15, it is a weak verb-initial and verb-final in EURASIAN genera but a weak verb-initial and strong verb-final in the World genera.
Not regarding the common typological parameters in the two types of verb-final and verb-initial languages in group (a) and (b), the statistical difference in group (c) with 8 strong verb initial parameters and in group (d) with 3 strong verb-final parameters is 5 in the World and EURASIAN genera. On the other hand, with regard to group (e), it can be said that in total, Khaniki in 5 parameters in EURASIAN genera and 4 parameters in the World genera has a tendency toward verb-initial languages. In comparison to other Iranian languages such as Shahmirzadi, Tati and Taleshi, Khaniki is a left-branching or first-head language in parameters 1, 3, 9 and therefore this language is in line with many Iranian languages in this regard including modern Persian. Khaniki is different from modern Persian in terms of word order typology just in parameter 5. Khaniki just like modern Persian uses an auxiliary verb to show the future tense.
Conclusion
Khaniki language is spoken in the village [xɑnik], locally called [xunek]. This variant (of language) belongs to South-Western Iranian languages. This language, as well as many other Iranian languages, is an endangered language. The audio data of this study was segmented and morphemic and interlinear glosses were provided with all the examples. After analyzing the data, in order to determine the typological parameters of Khaniki language in regard to word order typology in the adopted theoretical framework, based on the 24 correlation pairs of Dryer (1992), we came up with two tables. One of the tables shows the situation of Khaniki language compared to the World language genera and the other table reveals the position of this language compared to EURASIAN language genera. The data shows that Khaniki has 12 parameters of strong verb-final languages and 18 parameters of strong verb-initial languages in comparison to EURASIAN groups of languages (genera). This language also has 15 parameters of strong verb-final languages and 20 parameters of strong verb-initial languages in comparison to the world language genera. This language just like many other Iranian languages is a mixed-type language and it reinforces the fact that mixed-type can be a separate type itself.
تبلیغات
