چکیده:
The language of the Zoroastrian religious minority (Behdinan) in Yazd features a notable role for pronominal clitics to play in the agreement system of this Iranian language, now described as “definitely endangered” by the UNESCO. Drawing on findings of language typology, the present study takes a closer look at the pronominal clitics and the syntactic roles they assume in Behdinani. To this end, this study makes use of available books and written materials which investigate and record samples of the language in question as well as consultation and specimens provided by speakers of Behdinani. Factors such as tense, transitivity and modality as well as manifestation of direct/indirect object as pronominal elements determine and shape agreement system in the language of Zoroastrians in Yazd. This research finds four of the five patterns introduced by Comrie (1978) and elaborated on in Dabir-Moghaddam (2013a) in the agreement system of Behdinani language.
خلاصه ماشینی:
5) Subject agreement in auxiliary verbs 6) To indicate perfect aspect in the present perfect and pluperfect 7) In combination with elided prepositions in the form of es Gholami, alongside the examples he provides regarding the cases above, explains that the object clitics of this Dari variety appear only in the present tense.
This statement somewhat supports the point raised by Ivanov (1939), who considers ede, s as the reduced form of the preposition "from" or "to" in me; with the difference that Keshavarz's insight (who is himself a speaker of this language) paves the way for adding other structures that appear as vowels (especially kasra) to this list, and with this analysis, Gholami's description of the use of the clitic to indicate "verb aspect in certain tenses" seems unreliable.
For example, subject clitics in the language of the Zoroastrians of Yazd, in sentences constructed with the past stem of transitive verbs, place the verb as their syntactic host and attach to it as a prefix, as seen in (I said) tom=va.
68 past stem hit (kill) =clitic 3sm child ’He hit (killed) the child 1‘ A point encountered when examining the manifestation of the omitted explicit object (in the form of a pronoun) in past tense sentences is the existence of two distinct structures: in the first case, both the subject and the explicit object appear as pronominal clitics, where the non-emphasized subject can be omitted due to the pro-drop nature of the Dari language of the Zoroastrians, and then the object and subject agreement follow in order as pronominal clitics and are attached to the verb, like the following example: (Mazdapur, 1374: 458) mo=kart ̌os>̌ura=ss-̂pa .
(
, 
, 
)
