Focus, a pragmatic phenomenon, in Persian is in a close relation with prosody, syntax, semantics, and to some extent morphology. Since Persian is a scrambling language (Karimi 1999, 2003), different word orders accompanied by sentence stress, couls signal different foci. At the same time different markers structures, like clefts, are also going hand in hand with prosody to indicate focus of the sentence. Even a focus marker morpheme like KE marks the foci with prosody. This paper briefly introduces two kinds of foci in Persian, Broad Focus and Narrow Focus. These two different types of foci have different prosodic, semantic, syntactic and pragmatic features that are outlined in the paper.

   This article provides an informal semantic analysis for future forms in Persian and English languages. At first, the author goes through the vexed question of whether these languages possess such a thing as future tense. Providing his argumentation, he suggests that Futurity is not an absolute linguistic concept. Then, he compares and contrasts the use of different futurates (different future forms) in English and Persian. Based on the results of this process, he proposes a continuum for futurity in Persian (see 42). In that continuum, it is suggested that xastæn (meaning will) is the default future; that is, it is used only when the general preconditions for other futurates don't exist. Finally, it is concluded that the concept of futurity has been merged in other tenses, especially Simple Present. That is why , it is normally expressed with  these tenses.

          Nida’s theory of  translation which is inspired by TG was one of the most popular translation theories of the 20th centry . The present article discusses and challenges some of the major issues in the theory , such as its definition of translation equivalent, grammatical analysis and back-transformation , and concludes that it is , despite its few deficiencies, of great importance in translation studies , because of having provided not only means of analysing and classifying translation problems , but also practical insights into translating.

The study of different words in Hamedani accent reveals that one of its salient features is the change of initial /a/ into [e] in words consisted of two syllebles or more having no stress on the first syllable. So, the main goal of this research is the study of this phonological process or in other words the recognition of its phonological enviroment. This article is a field work in which a list of current words was firstly prepared, then their exact pronunciation according to the native speaker’s speech was recorded; also, according to the writer’s intuition as a native speaker, the words were transcribed phonologically and compared with its standard counterparts.             The main conclusion resulted from this comparison reveals that in Hamedani accent in words made up of two or more syllables the initial  vowel /a/ changes into [e].

The author of this article believes that the third singular personal ending has probably been the cause for the emergence of past tense affix in Iranian infinitives and verbs. This article deals with the varieties of third singular personal ending and past tense affix.

Linguistics, commonly defined as the science of language, has close connections with many other fields of study and human sciences due to the uniqueness of language to the human species. The field of translation studies, with regard to the nature of its issues, can be considered as the closest field to linguistics, the scientific study of language. The common issues of language and translation are so many and their interconnection is so firm that in many cases they cannot be regarded as independent of one another.             The relation between language and translation is an undeniable fact. What is discussed in this article is the nature of this relation. Some scholars believe that any translation is based implicitly on a theory of language, and as such, translation is, in fact, an exercise in applied linguistics. Some others maintain that any theory of language is based on a theory of translation. A third view is also suggested saying that language is essentially a translation of man’s mental concepts. Based on this view man practices language and translation simutaneously in his daily life.

Since Larson (1988) argued that VP is of two shells (layers) , higher with a light verb and the lower is with a lexical verb as its head, linguists have tried to investigate structures by which the claim can be evaluated. Persian causative constructions ( PCS ) with its various syntactic forms can be helpful in this respect.        This study argues that PCS is clearly formed of a light verb maximal projection ( vP) and a verb phrase projection ( VP).It is argued that the light verbs which stand as the head of  vP is Ǿ , KARDAN, and the affix “ – AN”.It is also argued that in some cases PCS shows some lexical changes in verbal constructions. So it seems that considering  lexical properties in structural analyses can provide a better description . The data of the study shows that at least one piece of evidence support the interface of function and form as functionalist believe.

This article examines the relation of dialectology as a discipline in its own right with historical linguistics. There are however some brief remarks on the relation of the former with other branches of linguistic studies, like those of socio-linguistics, and typology. In order to trace the connection and interrelation of historical linguistics and dialectology and their probable influences on each other, efforts are made to provide the reader with some information on the origin of dialectology and its emergence as a separate discipline. In this context a comparison is made as to the aims and methods used in both disciplines. In almost all discussions, examples are cited from Persian and other Iranian languages. Some evidences are also given to illustrate the earliest interests of Iranians in different dialects. This takes us back to as early as 12th century. In the remaining part of the article two instances of the practical uses of dialectology in diachronic studies of Persian language are exemplified.