A Comparative Syntactic Typological Study of Iranian Languages: A case of Persian and Kurdish

Ali Ashrafi
Iranian Dialects; Kurdish Dialects; Syntactic Typological; Indo-Iranian Dialects; Combinatorial Language Frameworks
Iranian dialects are subgroups of Indo-Iranian dialects and are arranges dependent on their course of events and locale. All Iranian dialects of the center and current occasions have some normal highlights. The plain word request is generally action word last, and the time framework depends on two action word lines, present and past, no matter what. While the current stem proceeds with the Old Iranian present that was acquired straightforwardly from Indo-European, the previous stem depends on a participatory type of the action word finishing off with – ta. The Iranian dialects are probably going to be spoken by in excess of 80 million individuals in a wide zone from Turkey with Zaza as the westernmost to China with Sarikoli as the western that the easternmost Iranian language and primarily cover the entirety of Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan. The advancement of the Iranian dialects can be analyzed in three significant chronicled periods: Old Iranian (up to the fourth/third century BC), Central Iranian (from the fourth/third century BC to the eighth/ninth century AD) and new Iranian language (since 900 AD). Two of the antiquated Iranian dialects are known and archived, Avestan and Old Persian. The Central Iranian dialects (approx. 300 BC – AD 950) are significantly more various. They are partitioned into two principle gatherings, western and eastern. Current Iranian dialects fall into two enormous “Eastern” and “Western” gatherings, with “Northern” and “Southern” sub-gatherings, separately. The qualification between the eastern and western Iranian dialects lies in the fundamental geological dispersion of the principle speakers of these dialects in the east or west of Lut deserts in Iran.
[1] Bernard Comrie (June 28, 1990),”The World’s Major Languages Reprint Edition”,Publisher : Oxford University Press, ISBN-10 : 0195065115, ISBN-13 : 978-0195065114, Language: English
[2] Haig & Öpengin, 2014, “Introduction to Special Issue : Kurdish – A critical research overview, Kurdish Studies, 4, (1), 25-50
[3] Alice C. Harris & Lyle Campbell (1998),”Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective”, (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 74). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Pp. xvii+488
[4] Anonby, E., Taheri-Ardali, M., & Hayes, A. (2019). The Atlas of the Languages of Iran (ALI): A Research Overview. Journal Iranian Studies, 52, 1-2
[5] Comrie, B. (1978). Ergativity. In W. Lehmann (ed.), Syntactic Typology. Sussex: The Harvester Press
[6] Comrie, B. (2009). The World’s Major Languages. Routledge: New York
[7] Comrie, B. 1978. Ergativity. In W. Lehmann (ed.), Syntactic
[8] Dabir-Moghaddam, M. (2012). Linguistic Typology: An Iranian Perspective. Journal of Universal Language, 13-1
[9] Haig, G., & Öpengin, E. (2014). Introduction to Special Issue Kurdish: A critical research overview, Kurdish StudiesVolume, 2(2), pp. 99 – 122
[10] Haspelmath, M. (2014). Comparative syntax: The Routledge Handbook of Syntax. Abingdon: Routledge
[11] Lindquist, H. (2009). Corpus Linguistics and the Description of English. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University Press
[12] Rezani, P. &Asadpour, H. (2008). Language Contact and Language Change: Evolution or Putrefy (A Cross-Cultural view of Multilingualism). 6th International METU Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics and Language Teaching

Received : 21 February 2021
Accepted : 02 April 2021
Published : 11 April 2021
DOI: 10.30726/ijlca/v8.i2.2021.82003