خلاصة:
چکیده صورتهایی از فعل «گرفتن»، در فارسی امروز، برای بیان مفهوم وجهی فرض و تصویر شرایطی غیر واقعی به کار گرفته میشوند. این پژوهش، پس از مرور بر پیشینۀ تحقیقات انجامشده در این حوزه و معرفی مبانی نظری در دو حوزۀ وجهیت و دستوریشدگی، با رویکردی درزمانی، به کاربردهای مختلف فعل «گرفتن» در فارسی باستان، فارسی میانه و فارسی نو پرداخته و با مرور شواهدی از سه دورۀ زبان، روند دستوریشدگی این فعل و کاربردهای وجهی آن را مورد توجه قرار داده است. نتایج این تحقیق نشان میدهد که در این روند، بسط استعاری، مقدّم شدن فعل و پذیرفتن بند پیرو به عنوان مفعول باعث شده است تا از طریق ساز وکارهایی مثل بازتحلیل و قیاس، صرفهای اول شخص مفرد ماضی، اول شخص مفرد و جمع مضارع و صورتهای امر از فعل «گرفتن» از شکل واژگانی خود فاصله بگیرند و با نزدیکتر شدن به کاربردهای دستوری، برای بیان وجهیت غیر واقعی و فرضی به کار گرفته شوند.
Abstract Introduction Diachronic approaches to the study of Persian language help us understand not only the historical features of this language, but also the characteristics of its modern usage. There are linguistic forms in New Persian derived from the verb “gereftan: to take” which play a modal role in sentences and indicate hypothetical actions and irrealis modality; in other words, they are used to help us express the modal concept of assumption and imagine unrealistic conditions. An example of such function can be seen in the following proverb:“giram pedar-e to bud fazel / az fazl-e pedar to ra ce hasel?”“Let me suppose that your father was a wise man, / what does his wisdom to do with you?” i.e. “Never mind who your grandfather was, what are you?”The main purpose of this article is to answer the question of how the verb "gereftan: to take" has acquired such a modal usage. In order to answer this question, it is necessary to show the process in which the verb "gereftan: to take" gradually takes distance from its lexical meaning and gets closer to grammatical functions. Methodology In this article, after a review of the literature, we go through the theoretical framework of the study regarding grammaticalization and modality. Accordingly, grammaticalization is defined as a process of change in languages through which lexical forms containing independent semantic meanings gradually obtain grammatical functions, for example to represent modality, aspect, etc. The linguistic form subject to changes such as desemanticization and phonetic reduction may, depending on the context, play a double role for a long period of time both as lexical and grammatical element. On the other hand, in a specific language, there might be several approaches to indicate a single grammatical sense such as modality. As time goes by, one of these approaches can overcome the others for the sake of its higher frequency of use in different contexts. As a result of later changes, such linguistic form may be decategorized and function merely as a grammatical device. The whole process of grammaticalization is under the influence of reanalysis and analogy.Before jumping to discussion, it is necessary that we review the definition of modality too. According to Lyons (1977), modality refers to the speaker’s opinions and attitudes towards propositions expressed with language or circumstances. Concepts such as assertion, obligation, supposition, etc. are amongst modal situations. Every language has its own specific tools to represent modality including “lexical” ways or “grammatical / semi-grammatical” linguistic devices such as verbal mood, modal verbs, adverbs of modality and. In New Persian, modality is more expressed by modal verbs and adverbs than by the verb moods.Within this framework and through a diachronic approach, we will discuss the different functions of the verb “gereftan: to take” in Persian. More specifically, here, evidence extracted from texts written in Old Persian, Middle Persian and New Persian is analyzed to clarify the process of grammaticalization of the verb “gereftan: to take” and its modal functions in theses contexts. Discussion The root “grab” in Old Persian texts, signifies “own something”, “seize something (as possession of / as prisoner)” (see Kent, 1953):1) xsacam hauv agarbayata: He seized the kingdom. (DB I, 41-42)2) …avam Vahyazdatam agarbaya…: That Vahyazdata they took prisoner. (DB III, 47-48) Later usages of the verb “gereftan: to understand” is not attested in Old Persian but can be traced back to Avestan texts (see Bartholomae, 1961):3) hiiat ϑβa həm casmaini həngrabəm: When I grasp you with my eyes. (Yasna 31.8, Humbach et al., 1991)Also, the root “grabh” in Sanskrit is used to signify “to understand”, “to learn”, “to calculate”, etc. (see Monier- Williams, 1899).In Middle Persian Zand texts, influenced by translation from Avestan, the verb “grift- / gir-” is used to mean “perceive through the senses” (Changizi, 2016). More specifically, the formula “pad… grift- / gir-” is frequently used in Middle Persian texts signifying “to consider”, “to suppose” and “to learn”:4) menog i xrad pad pustibanih girend…: When they consider / choose the spirit of wisdom as (their) guardian. (Anklesaria, 1913) 5) “wazag [o] awe gowisn ke wir a’on ku fraz gired.”“It is necessary to say the word to a person who has such comprehension that he grasps it.” (Denkart vi, Shaked, 1979)In New Persian, “gereftan” is used to construct some compound verbs such as “yad gereftan: to learn”, “pand gereftan: take advice”, “ebrat gereftan: to learn a lesson”, etc. In some contexts, the noun phrase object is replaced by a subordinate clause. Such changes pave the way for the verb “gereftan” in New Persian, to be topicalized, desemanticized and finally distanced from its lexical meaning. As a result, some forms of the verb “gereftan” go further in the path of grammaticalization to express modal concept of hypothetical actions and irrealis modality.The forms attested in the texts and also in colloquial and everyday language are restricted to the singular imperative ({be}-gir) (6), plural imperative (be-gir-id), in subjunctive mood, in present tense, first-person singular (gir-am) (7) and first-person plural (gir-im) (8), and first-person singular verb conjugated in past tense (gereft-am) (9).6) “gir ke giti hame cang ast-o nay …”: “let’s say the whole world is {full of the sound of} harp and ney …” (A poem by Anvari)7) “giram ke dar bavar-e-tan be xak nesaste-am / va saqeha-e javanam az zarbeha-e tabarha-tan zaxmdar ast / ba rise ce mi-kon-id?”“let’s say in your assumption I got broken down and defeated / and my young stalks are wounded by the blows of your axes / what are you going to do with roots?” (A Poem by Dadvar, 1990)8) “towbe gir-im ke baz ast dar-as sud-as cist?”“Let’s say the gate of repentance is open, what is the point?” (Unpublished poem by H. Zahmatkesh)9) “gereft-am ze to natavan-tar basi-st / tavana-tar az to ham axer kasi-st.”“let’s say there are many more feeble than you; Than you, at least One is more puissant, too.” (A poem by Sa’di)The whole construction can be formulized az “giram / girim / gereftam / gir (that) X, then Y” in which, X is the sentence expressing the hypothetical situation and Y is the one expressing its would-be result. Conclusion In this paper, different functions of the verb “gereftan: to take” in Persian were discussed. After reviewing the literature and theoretical framework of the study, evidence extracted from texts written in Old Persian, Middle Persian and New Persian was analyzed to clarify the process of grammaticalization of the verb “gereftan: to take” and its modal functions in these contexts. The results suggest that following a metaphorical extension, in specific contexts, the verb shifted to the beginning of the clause so that the noun phrase object was replaced by a subordinate clause. Thereby, due to mechanisms such as reanalysis and analogy, the first-person singular verb in past tense (gereft-am), first person singular and plural verb in present tense (gir-am, gir-im) and the imperative form of the verb ({be}gir) have gradually lost their lexical characteristics and gone further in the path of grammaticalization to indicate hypothetical actions and irrealis modality.