Construction Grammar

Idioms and collocations are part of lexical phrases which are of high importance in lexicography. One of the criteria for distinguishing these two types of phrases from each other is the inflexibility of their constituent elements. Idioms, unlike collocations, are not flexible in terms of word order and are always used in a fixed and specific form. The purpose of the present article was to show firstly whether all Persian idioms are inflexible against syntactic changes or some are flexible; secondly, to indicate how a new lexical phrase is created as a result of converting an idiom into a collocation. To illustrate this phenomenon, a new and practical definition for idioms and collocations, based on syntactic criteria not merely semantic, was provided. According to Construction Grammar, idioms were analyzed based on four syntactic tests: ‘passivization’, ‘clefting’, ‘dislocation’, and ‘interrogation’. Two hundred idioms were collected from two of the most up-to-date and comprehensive sources, namely Farsi Amiyaneh Dictionary (Abolhassan Najafi, 2008) and the two-volume Dictionary of Kenayat-e Sokhan (Hassan Anvari, 2019). Some idioms were flexible to syntactic changes, and behaved similarly to collocations. The flexibility of idioms led to introducing a new definition of these phrases based on syntactic criteria. Thus, such phrases were considered a kind of collocation, not an idiom. The result showed that converting an idiom into a collocation always creates a lexical phrase or lexeme with a new meaning. Finally, a plan was introduced to represent such idioms practically in Persian dictionaries.

This study examines how news headlines about the October 7, 2023, Gaza crisis employ linguistic structures to convey predetermined framing and reinforce power dynamics. Drawing on Information Structure Theory and the analytical framework of information packing theory, a corpus of 50 headlines from major international outlets (The New York Times, Reuters, CNN, AP, BBC, The Guardian, Al Jazeera) published between October 2023 and July 2025 was analyzed using qualitative discourse analysis. Information Structure Theory examines how speakers and writers organize and highlight pieces of information in sentences, such as what is presented as known or new, important or backgrounded, to guide the listener or reader’s attention and interpretation. The study investigates how syntactic and grammatical choices frame events, highlight causes, assign or obscure responsibility, and shape readers’ interpretations and thematic focus. Findings reveal that headlines systematically manipulate information structures to achieve pragmatic effects. Here, foregrounding (preposing) emphasizes key actors or consequences; postposing constructions activate presuppositions and dramatize urgency; passive voice, inversion, and interrogatives obscure responsibility and subtly assign or obscure blame; also, expansion constructions (relative clauses, appositives, and parentheticals) enrich context and amplify humanitarian or emotional dimensions. Overall, the study shows that linguistic choices function as pragmatic tools for managing discourse, framing narratives, and influencing perceptions of accountability. These results underscore the ideological and power dynamics embedded in news production and highlight the importance of analyzing information structures to understand how media discourse shapes public understanding and meaning.