انجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Corpus-based typology and word order in Persianردهشناسی پیکرهبنیاد و توالی کلمات در زبان فارسی1601411210.30465/lsi.2026.54514.1844FAمحمدراسخ مهندمحمدراسخ مهند0000-0002-3109-7787Journal Article20260426Abstract This study examines word order typology in Persian through the lens of corpus-based typology, challenging traditional grammar-based classifications. While grammar-based studies have characterized Persian as a ‘mixed’ language—exhibiting both verb-final and verb-initial features—they fail to capture the gradient nature of word order variation. Reviewing recent quantitative corpus studies across multiple syntactic parameters, this research demonstrates that Persian shows considerable disorder in head-dependent ordering but remarkable stability in subject-object ordering (over 90% subject-before-object). The presence of differential object marking (rā) does not enable flexible subject-object order, contrary to expectations. Furthermore, Persian places nominal objects before verbs in approximately 82% of cases, pronominal objects before verbs in 92% of cases, and adjectives after nouns in 95% of cases. The study advances areal explanations for these mixed properties, situating Persian within the Western Asia Transition Zone, where centuries of contact between Turkic (verb-final) and Semitic (verb-initial) languages have shaped Iranian languages. This regional perspective explains why Persian exhibits apparently contradictory typological features without necessarily being in transition toward a different type. The findings highlight the superiority of corpus-based approaches for revealing systematic patterns in word order variation and emphasize the need for expanded Persian corpora.1. IntroductionThis article presents a comprehensive investigation into the typology of word order in the Persian language, with a specific focus on the emerging paradigm of corpus-based typology. Traditional grammar-based typological studies, following the foundational work of Greenberg (1963) and Dryer (1992), have typically categorized languages into discrete typological classes based on the relative order of core syntactic elements, particularly the positioning of the verb with respect to subject and object. Persian has posed a persistent challenge to such categorical classifications, as it exhibits mixed characteristics that do not align neatly with either verb-initial or verb-final language types.Research Question(s)Does Persian conform to a consistent word order typology, and if not, what factors explain its mixed nature? Through a systematic review of corpus-based typological studies, this article demonstrates that Persian's word order properties are more complex and gradient than previously recognized, showing high disorder in some syntactic domains and remarkable stability in others.2. Literature ReviewGreenberg's (1963) seminal work established implicational universals that link word order patterns across languages. Dryer's (1992) subsequent elaboration identified strong correlations between verb-object positioning and other syntactic properties, allowing languages to be classified as either verb-initial/head-initial or verb-final/head-final. Persian was found to present an inconsistent profile when evaluated against these correlation pairs.Building on Dabir Moghaddam's (2013, 2018) comprehensive application of Dryer's parameters to Persian, the article shows that Persian demonstrates: Verb-final features in only four parameters, including the placement of adpositional phrases, manner adverbs, the copula, and wh-words. Verb-initial features in nine parameters, including relative clauses, genitive constructions, complementizers, and interrogative particles. Intermediate or mixed behavior in four additional parameters (comparative constructions, auxiliary placement, tense/mood markers, and object positioning). This distribution reveals that Persian cannot be confidently assigned to either typological category. Dabir-Moghaddam (2013) proposed two competing hypotheses: Persian is either undergoing a slow typological shift from verb-final to verb-initial, or it has inherently free word order. Examination of historical data from Old and Middle Persian supports the shift hypothesis, showing a gradual but consistent movement toward verb-initial patterns across historical periods.3. MethodologyThe last two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in typological research, driven by the proliferation of linguistic corpora. This development has given rise to what is now termed corpus-based typology, token-based typology, or gradient typology, in contrast to traditional feature-based or grammar-based approaches (Haig et al., 2022; Levshina, 2019, 2021; Levshina et al., 2023). Key innovations of this approach include: direct access to primary data, moving beyond second-hand judgments; context-sensitive analysis grounded in actual language use; quantitative measurements that capture the gradient nature of linguistic features; Discovery of new cross-linguistic generalizations and re-evaluation of established universals; enhanced explanatory power for cognitive, functional, diachronic, and areal accounts.Several corpus types have proven valuable for typological investigations, including parallel corpora (e.g., Universal Declaration of Human Rights translations, Europarl, film subtitle corpora), comparable corpora (e.g., Multi-CAST), and corpora with unified annotation (e.g., Universal Dependencies). These resources enable systematic cross-linguistic comparison and quantitative analysis of word order patterns.4. ResultsHead-Dependent Ordering: Futrell et al. (2015) examined dependency length minimization across 34 languages, measuring the disorder (entropy) in head-dependent ordering. Persian occupies a position in the lower half of their entropy scale, indicating considerable inconsistency in whether it is consistently head-initial or head-final across different construction types. While the language places verbs sentence-finally, it cannot be characterized as consistently head-final. Notably, both Turkish (head-final) and Arabic (head-initial) show approximately half the disorder of Persian, demonstrating greater typological consistency.Subject-Object Ordering: Remarkably, despite its mixed head-dependent ordering, Persian exhibits high stability in subject-object ordering. Futrell et al. (2015) and Levshina et al. (2023) demonstrate that Persian places subjects before objects in over 90% of cases, placing it among languages with rigid subject-object order. This finding is particularly significant given Persian's differential object marking (DOM) system employing the marker *rā* (Rasekh-Mahand & Parizadeh, 2024). Contrary to expectations that case marking enables freer word order, Persian's DOM does not result in flexible subject-object ordering, aligning with the cross-linguistic pattern that languages with robust case systems may nonetheless maintain fixed word order.Interaction between Case Marking and Word Order: Levshina (2019) and Levshina et al. (2023) establish a nuanced relationship between case marking and word order flexibility. Languages with comprehensive case systems (e.g., Lithuanian, Hungarian, Latin) tend to show greater word order flexibility, while languages with reduced or differential marking exhibit more rigid order. Persian's DOM system places it in an intermediate position: it has some case marking but maintains relatively fixed word order. This pattern confirms functional-adaptive explanations for word order properties: languages tend to maintain sufficient disambiguation strategies, either through case marking or through fixed word order, but these strategies are not necessarily mutually enabling (Levshina, 2019, p. 547).Agreement and Word Order: Spirgath (2025) examines the interaction between verb agreement and word order entropy, showing a negative correlation: languages with stronger agreement tend to show more rigid word order. Persian, which has robust agreement marking, confirms this pattern, showing relatively low word order disorder (approximately 20% flexibility) despite its rich agreement system. This finding distinguishes agreement from case marking, as the two systems serve complementary functions in information management.Multiple Word Order Parameters: Gerdes et al. (2021) provide detailed quantitative analysis of several word order parameters: Object-Verb Order: Persian places both nominal and pronominal objects before the verb in over 90% of cases, showing remarkable consistency comparable to Turkish and contrasting sharply with Arabic and English. Adjective-Noun Order: Persian overwhelmingly (approximately 95%) places adjectives after nouns, confirming Greenberg's Universal 19 and showing greater consistency than expected in a mixed typology language. Adverb Placement: Persian places lexical adverbs before the verb in over 96% of cases, but adverbial clauses appear postverbally in approximately 17% of cases, revealing variable behavior depending on adverbial type. Adposition Type: Persian is consistently prepositional, aligning with Arabic and contrasting with Turkish, demonstrating one of the most stable parameters in the language.Post-Predicate Elements: Focusing on post-predicate constituents, Rasekh-Mahand et al. (2024) and Haig et al. (2024a) demonstrate that goal and caused goal arguments show the highest frequency of postverbal placement, with Persian placing 84% of goal arguments after the verb. This behavior is not random but systematically conditioned by semantic role, with animacy, style, and constituent weight playing secondary roles. Most importantly, this phenomenon cannot be attributed to information structure but reflects a structural property of colloquial Persian.5. Discussion The article advances areal-typological explanations for Persian's mixed word order properties, drawing on the concept of the Western Asia Transition Zone (WATZ) proposed by Haig (2017) and Haig and Khan (2018). This region, encompassing parts of Iran, eastern Turkey, and northern Iraq, has historically been a contact zone between Turkic (verb-final, postpositional), Semitic (verb-initial, prepositional), Indo-European (primarily Iranian), and Kartvelian language families.Stilo (2005, 2009) pioneered the analysis of how Persian and other Iranian languages have been shaped by their position between these typologically distinct families. His research demonstrates that Iranian languages in the north and east (adjacent to Turkic and Caucasian languages) show more verb-final characteristics, while those in the west and south (adjacent to Semitic languages) show more verb-initial features. Haig et al. (2025) provide corpus-based confirmation of these patterns across 35 language varieties in the WATZ. Key findings include:Object Position: While Iranian and Turkic languages historically maintain object-before-verb order in over 90% of instances, Semitic languages in the region show variable behavior. Some Neo-Aramaic varieties, surrounded by Iranian languages, have adopted object-before-verb order, demonstrating contact-induced change.Postverbal Goal Arguments: The widespread tendency to place goal arguments after the verb extends across language families in the WATZ, with Iranian and Turkic languages showing rates of 60-100% postverbal goal placement. This pattern is strongest in western Iranian languages (closer to Semitic contact) and weaker in eastern varieties (further from Semitic contact).Adposition Type: Iranian languages show a gradient from predominantly postpositional in the north and east (closer to Turkic) to predominantly prepositional in the west and south (closer to Semitic), with many languages exhibiting both.These areal patterns challenge purely historical explanations for Persian's mixed typology. Rather than representing an inherent property or a unidirectional diachronic shift, Persian's mixed characteristics reflect centuries of contact with typologically diverse language families. This perspective explains why Persian can be simultaneously verb-final (in object-verb order) and prepositional (patterned with verb-initial languages) without indicating transitional status or free word order.6. ConclusionThis review of corpus-based typological research reveals several crucial insights about Persian word order. Persian's typological properties are not binary but exist on a continuum, showing high disorder in some domains (head-dependent ordering, postverbal argument placement) and high stability in others (subject-object ordering, adjective-noun order, adposition type). The interaction between case marking, agreement, and word order supports functional explanations: languages maintain sufficient disambiguation mechanisms without unnecessary redundancy. Persian's mixed properties cannot be attributed solely to internal historical development but reflect prolonged contact with neighboring language families in the Western Asia Transition Zone. Corpus-based approaches provide more accurate and nuanced descriptions than grammar-based typology, revealing systematic patterns in apparent disorder.Bibliography:Csató, É. Á., Isaksson, B., & Jahani, C. (Eds.) (2005). Linguistic convergence and areal diffusion: Case studies from Iranian, Semitic and Turkic. Routledge. Dabir Moghaddam, M. (2018). Typological approaches and dialects. In A. Sedighi & P. Shabani-Jadidi (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Persian linguistics (pp. 52–88). Oxford University Press.Dryer, M. S. (1992). The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language, 68, 81-138.Dryer, M. S. (1997). On the six-way word order typology. Studies in Language, 21(2), pp. 69–103. Dryer, M. S. (2013). Order of subject, object and verb. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), WALS Online (v2020.4) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13950591. Retrieved from http://wals.info/chapter/81. Dryer, M. S., & Haspelmath, M. (Eds.) (2013). WALS Online (v2020.4) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13950591. Retrieved from https://wals.info. Frommer, P. (1981). Post-verbal phenomena in colloquial Persian syntax (Doctoral dissertation), University of Southern California.Futrell, R., Mahowald, K., Edward Gibson, E. (2015). Large-scale evidence of dependency length minimization in 37 languages. PNAS, 112(33), pp. 10336–10341. Gerdes, K., Kahane S., and Chen, X. (2021). Typometrics: From Implicational to Quantitative Universals in Word Order Typology. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 6(1): 17. 1–31. DOI: https://doi. org/10.5334/gjgl.764 Goldhahn, D., Eckart, Th., Quasthoff, U. (2012). Building Large Monolingual Dictionaries at the Leipzig Corpora Collection: From 100 to 200 Languages. In: Calzolari, N., Choukri, Kh., Declerck, Th. et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 759–765. Istanbul: ELRA. Greenberg, J. (1963/1966). Some Universals of Grammar with Particular Reference to the Order of Meaningful Elements. Universals of Language, London: MIT Press, pp. 110-113.Haig, G. (2017). Western Asia: East Anatolia as a transition zone. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Areal Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP. pp. 396-423. Haig, G. & Khan, G. (2018). Introduction. In: Haig, Geoffrey & Geoffrey Khan (eds.) The languages and linguistics of Western Asia. An areal perspective. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Pp. 1-29.Haig, G. & Rasekh-Mahand, M. (2019). Post-predicate constituents in Iranian and neighboring languages. Position paper for the project Post-predicate constituents in Iranian and neighboring languages. https://www.uni-bamberg.de/fileadmin/aspra/05_Events/2019_Post Haig, G., & Rasekh-Mahand, M. (Eds.). (2022). HamBam: The Hamedan-Bamberg corpus of contemporary spoken Persian. University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/resources/hambam/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (2014). Annotations using GRAID (Grammatical Relations and Animacy in Discourse): Introduction and guidelines for annotators (Version 7.0). https://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (2015). Multi-CAST: Multilingual corpus of annotated spoken texts. University of Bamberg. https://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (Eds.). (2023). Multi-CAST: Multilingual corpus of annotated spoken texts (Version 2311). University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., Schnell, S., & Seifart, F. (Eds.). (2022). Doing corpus-based typology with spoken language corpora: State of the art (Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 25). University of Hawai‘i Press. https://doi.org/10.5167/uzh-217096Haig, G., & Rasekh-Mahand, M. (Eds.). (2022). HamBam: The Hamedan-Bamberg corpus of contemporary spoken Persian. University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/resources/hambam/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (2014). Annotations using GRAID (Grammatical Relations and Animacy in Discourse): Introduction and guidelines for annotators (Version 7.0). https://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (2015). Multi-CAST: Multilingual corpus of annotated spoken texts. University of Bamberg. https://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., & Schnell, S. (Eds.). (2023). Multi-CAST: Multilingual corpus of annotated spoken texts (Version 2311). University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/Haig, G., Schnell, S., & Schiborr, N. N. (2021). Universals of reference in discourse and grammar: Evidence from the Multi-CAST collection of spoken corpora. In G. Haig, S. Schnell, & F. Seifart (Eds.), Doing corpus-based typology with spoken language corpora (Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 25). University of Hawai‘i Press.Haig, G., Vollmer, M., & Thiele, H. (2019). Multi-CAST Northern Kurdish. In G. Haig & S. Schnell (Eds.), Multi-CAST: Multilingual corpus of annotated spoken texts (Version 2311). University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/#nkurdHaig, G., Stilo, D., Schiborr, N. N., & Dogan, M. (Eds.). (2022). WOWA: Word Order in Western Asia: A spoken-language-based corpus for investigating areal effects in word order variation. University of Bamberg. http://multicast.aspra.uni-bamberg.de/resources/wowa/Haig, G., Rasekh-Mahand, M., Stilo, D., Schreiber, L., & Schiborr, N. N. (Eds.). (2024a). Post-predicate elements in the Western Asian Transition Zone: A corpus-based approach to areal typology (Contact and Multilingualism 8). Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/395Haig, G., Rasekh-Mahand, M., Stilo, D., Schreiber, L., & Schiborr, N. (2024b). Post-predicate elements in the Western Asian Transition Zone: Data, theory, and methods. In G. Haig, M. Rasekh-Mahand, D. Stilo, L. Schreiber, & N. Schiborr (Eds.), Post-predicate elements in the Western Asian Transition Zone: A corpus-based approach to areal typology (pp. 1–48). Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/395Haig, G., Noorlander, P., & Schiborr, N. (2025). Which word order features are stable in a contact setting? Corpus-based evidence from the Western Asian Transition Zone. In J. Darquennes, J. C. Salmons, & W. Vandenbussche (Eds.), Language contact, an international handbook (Vol. 2, pp. 159–184). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110443011-010Levshina, N. (2015). European analytic causatives as a comparative concept: Evidence from a parallel corpus of film subtitles. Folia Linguistica, 49(2), 487–520.Levshina, N. (2019). Token-based typology and word order entropy. Linguistic Typology, 23(3), 533–572. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2019-0025Levshina, N. (2022a). Corpus-based typology: Applications, challenges and some solutions. Linguistic Typology, 26(1), 129–160.Levshina, N. (2022b). Communicative efficiency: Language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.Levshina, N., Nambodiripad, S., Allassonnière-Tang, M., Kramer, M., Talamo, L., Verkerk, A., Wilmoth, S., Garrido Rodriguez, G., Gupton, T. M., Kidd, E., Liu, Z., Naccarato, C., Nordlinger, R., Panova, A., & Stoynova, N. (2023). Why we need a gradient approach to word order. Linguistics, 61(4), 825–883. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2021-0098Parizadeh, M., & Rasekh-Mahand, M. (2024). Post-predicate elements in Early New Persian. In G. Haig, M. Rasekh-Mahand, D. Stilo, L. Schreiber, & N. Schiborr (Eds.), Post-predicate elements in the Western Asian Transition Zone: A corpus-based approach to areal typology (pp. 184–196). Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/395Rasekh-Mahand, M., & Parizadeh, M. (2024). Different functions of ‘rā’ in New Persian: A semantic map analysis. Journal of Historical Linguistics, 14(1), 31–57. https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.21056.rasRasekh-Mahand, M., Izadi, E., Parizadeh, M., Haig, G., & Schiborr, N. (2024). Post-predicate elements in colloquial Persian: A multi-variate analysis. In G. Haig, M. Rasekh-Mahand, D. Stilo, L. Schreiber, & N. Schiborr (Eds.), Post-predicate elements in the Western Asian Transition Zone: A corpus-based approach to areal typology (pp. 151–182). Language Science Press. https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/395Schnell, S., & Schiborr, N. N. (2022). Crosslinguistic corpus studies in linguistic typology. Annual Review of Linguistics, 8, 171–191. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031120-104629Spirgath, A. (2025). The interaction of word order entropy and verb agreement: A token-based approach. Linguistics in Amsterdam, 16(1), 30–50.Stilo, D. (1994). Phonological systems in contact in Iran and Transcaucasia. In M. Marashi (Ed.), Persian studies in North America: Studies in honor of Mohammad Ali Jazayery. Iranbooks.Stilo, D. (2005). Iranian as buffer zone between the universal typologies of Turkic and Semitic. In É. Á. Csató, B. Isaksson, & C. Jahani (Eds.), Linguistic convergence and areal diffusion: Case studies from Iranian, Semitic and Turkic (pp. 35–63). Routledge.Stilo, D. (2009a). Circumpositions as an areal response: The case study of the Iranian zone. Turkic Languages, 13, 3–33.Stilo, D. (2009b). Case in Iranian: From reduction and loss to innovation and renewal. In A. L. Malchukov & A. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of case. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199206476.013.0049Stilo, D. (2012). Intersection zones, overlapping isoglosses, and ‘Fade-out/Fade-in’ phenomena in Central Iran. In B. Aghaei & M. R. Ghanoonparvar (Eds.), Iranian languages and culture: Essays in honor of Gernot Ludwig Windfuhr (pp. 3–33). Mazda Publishers.Tiedemann, J. (2012). Parallel data, tools and interfaces in OPUS. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. U. Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk, & S. Piperidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2012) (pp. 2214–2218). European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Vatanen, T., Väyrynen, J. J., & Virpioja, S. (2010). Language identification of short text segments with n-gram models. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’10) (pp. 3423–3430). European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Verkerk, A. (2014). The evolutionary dynamics of motion event encoding [Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen].Zeman, D., et al. (2024). Universal Dependencies 2.15 [Data set]. LINDAT/CLARIAH-CZ digital library, Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics (ÚFAL), Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University. http://hdl.handle.net/11234/1-5787این مقاله به بررسی ردهشناسی توالی کلمات در زبان فارسی با تمرکز بر رویکرد ردهشناسی پیکرهبنیاد اختصاص دارد. مطالعة ردهشناختی دستوربنیاد توالی کلمات در زبان فارسی نشان داده است که زبان فارسی، با این که گرایشی غالب ولی غیرقطعی به سمت الگوهای فعلآغازی دارد، در طبقهبندی سادهشده به عنوان زبان «فعلآغاز» یا «فعلپایان» قرار نمیگیرد، بلکه زبانی آمیخته است. در مورد چرایی این ردة آمیخته نیز فرضیههایی مطرح شده است، ازجمله اینکه زبان فارسی در حال گذار به ردة فعلآغاز است. در این مقاله نخست با مرور مطالعات ردهشناسی پیکرهبنیاد با استفاده از دادههای زبانی واقعی و کمّی، تصویر کاملتر و مدرّجی از بینظمی توالی کلمات در زبانهای جهان و به تبع آن وضعیت فارسی ارائه شده است. مطالعات پیکرهای منتخب نشان میدهند که بینظمی توالی کلمات در فارسی یکسان نیست. برای مثال، در توالی هسته و وابسته، فارسی بینظمی نسبتاً بالایی دارد، اما در توالی فاعل و مفعول، توالی بسیار ثابتی (عمدتاً فاعل قبل از مفعول) دارد. همچنین، اگرچه فارسی مفعولنمایی افتراقی با استفاده از نشانة «را» دارد، این امر منجر به آزادی زیاد در ترتیب فاعل و مفعول نشده است. در نهایت، سعی در تبیین ویژگیهای توالی کلمات زبان فارسی بر اساس ردهشناسی منطقهای شده است. به عبارتی سعی شده نشان داده شود بینظمیهای موجود در توالی کلمات این زبان و تفاوت آن با زبانهای فعلآغاز و فعلپایان، میتواند حاصل تماس زبانی بلندمدت و تاثیرپذیری از زبانهای همسایه، بهویژه زبانهای سامی و ترکی، در «منطقه انتقالی غرب آسیا» باشد. بررسی توالیهای مفعول اسمی و فعل، مفعول ضمیری و فعل، هدف و فعل، و حرف اضافه و اسم نشان میدهد تماس زبانی تاثیر مشخصی روی بینظمی در توالی کلمات داشته است. در نهایت بر اهمیت پژوهشهای پیکرهبنیاد و ساخت پیکرههای بیشتر برای زبان فارسی و سایر زبانهای ایرانی تأکید شده است.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14112_107387d5d48032f826cb8b095753b055.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823An Inquiry into the Concept of Zandجستاری در مفهوم زند61921405810.30465/lsi.2026.53946.1838FAحمیدرضادالوند......................................0009-0001-2456-8480Journal Article20260102AbstractThe concept of Zand occupies an ambiguous and multifaceted position within the Zoroastrian tradition. Conventionally, the term Zand refers to the translation of Avestan texts into the Pahlavi language carried out by religious scholars. However, this definition hardly captures the full complexity and interpretive depth inherent in the notion. Over the past three centuries, numerous Western scholars have sought to examine both the explicit and implicit dimensions of Zand, producing an array of interpretations and raising fundamental questions regarding its etymology, its usage within Avestan and Pahlavi texts—particularly in the interplay between Manthra and Zand—its conceptual definition, semantic evolution, the existence of an exegetical tradition among Zand interpreters, the sacredness attributed to Zand texts, their possible oral or written modes of transmission, the influence of foreign intellectual traditions, and the nature of Zand as a translation or commentary on the Avesta. This paper undertakes a comprehensive synthesis of these varied scholarly perspectives, critically examining their foundations and interrelations in order to construct a coherent and refined understanding of the concept of Zand. Through this comparative and analytical approach, the study aims to clarify the boundaries and meaning of Zand and to dispel the conceptual ambiguities that have long surrounded it.1. IntroductionThe concept of Zand has long been a subject of contentious debate within Zoroastrian literature. It has remained a focal point of inquiry—necessitating rigorous clarification and demystification—across the Avestan, Pahlavi, and subsequent traditions, as well as in the extensive contemporary scholarship produced by Western researchers concerning the exegesis and translation of Zoroastrian texts. Arguably, the impetus for these investigations originated from the persistent encounter with the binomials “abastāg ud zand” and “zand ud abastāg,” which permeate Pahlavi literature and the Zoroastrian tradition of the Islamic era. This nomenclature became a source of significant historiographical distortion for pioneering Western scholars, such as Anquetil-Duperron, in their taxonomy of the Avesta and its sacred commentaries. It was only later that Martin Haug discerned this terminological ambiguity, endeavoring to delineate the distinction between Zand and Avesta (cf. Cantera 2004; Haug 1862; Nyberg 1980).Central to these scholarly endeavors is the etymological excavation of the term Zand and an analysis of its semantic trajectory from the Avestan period to the Pahlavi texts. In his Altiranisches Wörterbuch (1904, p. 342, p.1120), Bartholomae provided a seminal elucidation of the term and its compounds within various Avestan strata. Cantera (2004, p.2–4) has synthesized the varied interpretations offered by scholars regarding these Avestan forms, contextualized by their usage within the texts. Notwithstanding their nuanced insights, these analyses largely converge upon Bartholomae’s original interpretation, which renders the term as “explanation, clarification, or exegesis.” Consequently, within the ancient Zoroastrian tradition, as perceived by the editors and compilers of the Avestan canon, the concept of Zand is intrinsically linked to the “cognition, knowledge, and exegesis of the text” (cf. Boyce 1968, p. 35).The discourse within both the Zoroastrian tradition and contemporary Western scholarship indicates that the subject extends beyond mere lexical interpretation; it encompasses both the philological evolution of the term and the shifting scope of its referents over time. Fundamental questions persist: Does Zand signify translation or exegesis? Was it considered a sacred text equivalent to the Avesta? What is the chronology of the Zands and the processes of their inception? Did they precede the written Avesta? What is the ontological status of their sanctity? How does the usage and composition of the term fluctuate across distinct historical periods, and how should we critically evaluate the extant corpus of Zands? These remain the paramount issues currently occupying the scholarly community.2. Literature ReviewIn this context, the term Zand denotes the translation, explication, and exegesis of the Avesta; thus, it is imperative to delineate the evolution of the Western scholarly engagement with these texts. Josephson (1997, pp. 12–17) provides a comprehensive survey of the scholarship preceding the final decade of the twentieth century. By the end of the nineteenth century, two distinct schools of Avestan exegesis had emerged: the Traditionalists, led by Darmesteter, who maintained that comprehension of the Avesta was contingent upon the Zands; and the Vedists, the school of comparative linguistics led by Geldner, which dismissed the Zands and advocated for comparative philology grounded in the Vedas to interpret Avestan texts. The twentieth century was largely dominated by the Geldnerian paradigm. This hegemony was further reinforced by the discovery of the Turfan fragments, which influenced new readings of Pahlavi texts and relegated Zand philology to the periphery of Avestan studies. Nevertheless, scholars of religion, prioritizing semantic and theological context over rigid structuralism, continued to assert the importance of these texts as repositories of evolving religious thought. From the mid-twentieth century, Parsi scholars such as Dhabhar and B.T. Anklesaria undertook the collation of Zand manuscripts and produced critical editions of the extant Avestan Zands. Simultaneously, the circle of French Iranists centered around Duchesne-Guillemin, which focused heavily on the interpretation of the Dēnkard in the latter half of the century, renewed scholarly interest in the Zand tradition. Despite Klingenschmitt’s (1969) reaffirmation of the negative philological stance toward the Zands, the turn of the twenty-first century marked a significant renaissance in Zand research (cf. Cantera 2004, pp. 35–104).Among contemporary scholars, particularly within the final decade of the twentieth century, three figures have extensively investigated the complexities and transformations of the Zands—all through foundational doctoral research, underscoring the recent surge of academic interest in the field: Judith Josephson (1997) at Uppsala University; Dan Shapira (1998) at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and Alberto Cantera, whose 2004 monograph, Studien zur Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta, represents the definitive expansion of his doctoral dissertation.In contrast, within the Iranian academic landscape—with the exception of sporadic articles by Jaleh Amouzgar (2016, pp. 669–672) and a few graduate theses—the systematic, critical study of the Zands remains significantly underdeveloped. 3. MethodologyThis article endeavors to document the historical evolution of the term Zand by examining its conceptual nuances and functional applications within Pahlavi texts and the Zoroastrian tradition. The methodological framework involves the systematic collation of evidence from ancient texts, followed by a rigorous philological and analytical examination. Subsequently, the findings are critically synthesized and evaluated in light of contemporary scholarly discourse.4. ResultsA. The zand texts have been less studied compared to other fields of ancient Iranian studies.B. The term zand remains an ambiguous concept.C. zand is a multifaceted concept, and this article addresses its various dimensions.5. Discussion The Zands have garnered varying degrees of scholarly attention from the dawn of the eighteenth century to the present, with a significant surge in interest observed in recent decades. The concept of Zand has historically been characterized by a certain degree of semantic ambiguity across Avestan, Pahlavi, and post-Islamic Arabic and Persian texts. Consequently, scholars have proposed a diverse array of definitions and multifaceted descriptions of its dimensions. Evidence of Zand-writing (exegesis) has been documented and verified across the Avesta, epigraphic records, and various other Iranian and non-Iranian languages. The Zands emerge from an ancient exegetical tradition and possess an inherent sanctity; while they maintain a written form, they are underpinned by a robust oral tradition. Furthermore, traces of linguistic borrowing and intercultural interaction are discernible within the Zand corpus. Nonetheless, when Zand is understood in its specific sense—the translation of the Avesta into Pahlavi—it must be noted that it does not encompass merely any linguistic rendition. Rather, it refers to those translations produced by Zoroastrian clergy to meet the exigencies of their era, spanning from the post-Achaemenid period to the early Islamic centuries.6. ConclusionExisting scholarship has predominantly scrutinized the Zands through a philological lens, treating them as linguistic transfers or translations of the Avesta into Pahlavi. However, it must be asserted that even in the sense of word-for-word translation, the Zand represents a profound religious perception (reception) of sacred texts by high-ranking clergy, shaped by the needs of the time. This perception transcended mere linguistics to become a juridical (fiqh-like) proposition that actively shaped historical reality. Thus, the Zands are inextricably linked to the subjectivity and character of the cleric, rather than being a mere conventional transmission of text from one language to another. The Zands are the convergence of linguistic understanding, religious piety, and the socio-religious politics of the era, embodied in the person of the Zand-writer. A true Zand can only be produced when a figure approaching the sanctity of the Prophet Zarathustra emerges. Therefore, it can be concluded that Zand is an ongoing, pervasive phenomenon that is not strictly confined to the translation of Avestan into Pahlavi. As long as a righteous and authoritative cleric provides a religious perception that serves as a definitive proof (hujjat) for the faithful, the Zand remains a living, generative force, regardless of the target language. This is evidenced by the fact that from the fifth century AH onwards, New Persian became the new medium for the religious insights of Zoroastrian priests, giving rise to “Neo-Zands” (now-zand-ha).BibliographyAmouzegar, Zhaleh, & Ahmad Tafazzoli. (2007). Kitab-e Panjom-e Denkard [The Fifth Book of the Denkard]. Mo’in. [In Persian] .Amouzegar, Zhaleh. (2016). Zand. In Daneshnameh-ye Jahan-e Islam [Encyclopedia of the Islamic World] . 21. 669–672. Bonyad-e Daneshnameh-ye Jahan-e Islam. [In Persian]Baily, H. W. (1971). Zoroastrian Problems in the ninth century Books, Oxford.Bartholomae Chr. (1961). Altiranisches Wörterbuch. Strassburg.Boyce, M. (1968). Middle Persian Literature. In: Handbuch der Orientalistik. 1.4.(2.1), 32-66.Boyce, Mary, & F. Grener. (1996). Tarikh-e Kish-e Zarathusht Pas az Eskandar [Zoroastrianism: An Introduction. Under Macedonian and Roman rule], vol. 3:. Translated by Homayoun Sanati-Zadeh. Tehran: Toos. [In Persian].Cantera . A. (1999). Die Stellung der Sprache der Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta innerhalb des Mittelpersischen, Studia Iranica, 28, 173–207.Cantera, A. (2004). Studien zur Pahlavi-Übersetzung des Avesta. Harrassowitz Verlag.Cherti, Carlo.(2016). Adabiyat-e Pahlavi [Pahlavi Literature]. Translated by Pantea Soraya. Nashr-e Farzan. [In Persian].de Menasce, J. (1973). Le troisième livre de Dēnkart. Paris (Bibliothèque des œuvres classiques persanes 4. Travaux de l’Institut d’études iraniennes de l’Université de Paris 5). Frhang-ī ōīm ēwak(1397). [ōīm ēwak Dictionary]. Translated and researched by Farzaneh Gashtasb and Nadia Hajipour. Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. [In Persian].Fadhilat, Fereydoon. (2020). Kitab-e Denkard-e Sevom [The Third Book of the Denkard]. Barsam. [In Persian].Geldner (1886–1896). Avesta. The Sacred Books of the Parsis. 3 vols. Stuttgart.Genioux, Philippe. (1993). Ardaviraf-nameh [The Book of Arda Viraf]. Translated and researched by Zhaleh Amouzegar. Mo’in. [In Persian].Gignoux, Ph. (1986). sur l’inexistence d’un Bahman yasht Avestique. Journal of Asian and African studies. 32, 53-64.Gignoux, Ph. (1991). Les Quarter Inscriptions du Mage Kirdīr, Paris.Haug, M. (1862). Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Religion of the Parsis. Studies on Zoroastrian Religion and the Zend-Avesta, their origins, development, structure, texts and linguistic composition. London.Josephson, J. (1997). the Pahlavi Translation technique as illustrated by hōm yašt. Upppsala.Klingenschmittt, G. (1978). Der Beitrag der Paahlavi-Literatur zur Interpretation des Avesta. Munchener studien zur Sprachwissenschaft. 37, 93-107.Kotwal, F. M. & Ph. G. Kreyenbroek (1992). The Hērbedestān and Nērangestān. Volume I: Hērbedestān. Paris (StIr, Cahier 10).Madan, D. M. (1911). the complete text of the Pahlavi Dinkard. Bombay (= DkM).Moazami, M. (2014). Wrestling with the Demons of the Pahlavi Wīdēwdād. Iran Studies 9. Leiden/Boston.Nyberg, H. S. (1938).Die Religionen des alten Iran. Leipzig.Shaked, sh. (1994). Dulism in Transformation: varieties of Religion in Sasaian Iran. London.Schaeder, H. (1930). Iranische Beiträge. Halle.Shæjrvø, P. O. (1998). Kirdir’s Vision. In: Archaologische Mitteilungen aus Iran. 16, 269- 306.Shæjrvø, P. O. (2012). The Zoroastrian Oral Tradition as Reflected in the texts. In: Iranica 20, 3-48.Shapira, D. (1998). Studies in Zoroastrian Exegesis Zand, thesis submitted for the degree. Doctor of Philosophy in Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Vevaina, Y. S –D. (2023). The Sūdgar Nask of Dēnkard Book 9 Text. Translation and Critical Apparatus, Harrassowitz Verlag.Vevaina, Y. S –D. (2024). Zoroastrian Hermeneutics in Late Antiquity Commentary on the Sūdgar Nask of Dēnkard Book 9. Harrassowitz Verlag.Widengren, G. (1998). Din-ha-ye Iran [Religions of Iran]. Translated by Manouchehr Farhang. Tehran: Agahan-e Ideh. [In Persian].Zarshenas, Zohreh. (2001). Jostare-ha dar Zaban-ha-ye Irani-ye Miyane-ye Sharghi [Essays on Eastern Middle Iranian Languages]. Tehran: Farvahar. [In Persian].Zartosht-nameh [The Book of Zarathustra]. (1959). Edited by Frederick Rosenberg, researched by Mohammad Dabir-Siaghi. Tehran: Tahouri Bookstore. [In Persian].چکیده:زند مفهومی پر ابهام در سنت زردشتی است. ترجمه متون اوستایی به زبان پهلوی توسط دین مردان را زند گویند. اما نه به همین سادگی و شفافیت که در این تعریف کوتاه آمده است. به همین سبب، در سه سده گذشته پژوهشگران غربی در ابعاد پیدا و پنهان مفهوم چند وجهی زند نظرات متعددی بیان کردهاند و پرسشهایی را مطرح ساختهاند که ریشه شناسی زند و کاربست آن در متون اوستایی و پهلوی، مانثره و زند، تعریف زند، تحول معنایی زند، تایید وجود یک سنت تفسیری در نزد زندپژوهان، قدسیت زندها، شفاهی یا مکتوب بودن زندها، زند و اندیشه بیگانه، زند به مثابه ترجمه اوستا و چیستی آن از جمله بحثها و پرسشهای یادشده هستند. مقاله پیش رو به جمعبندی آرای مختلف در باره ابعاد مختلف مفهوم زند میپردازد. برآن است تا با بررسی و سنجش آنها، تصویری منسجم و روشن از این مفهوم فراهم سازد و از آن ابهام زدایی کند. کلید واژه: سنت زردشتی؛ اوستا؛ زندها؛ زندپژوهی؛https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14058_91836ea292e688863d5165ae32aef8ff.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Analyzing the Performance of Large Language Models in the Automatic Conversion of Colloquial Persian to Standard Writing based on the Confirmed Persian Orthography Grammarتحلیلی بر عملکرد مدلهای زبانی بزرگ در تبدیل خودکار گفتارینویسی به نوشتار معیار براساس دستور خط مصوب فارسی931321405910.30465/lsi.2026.52503.1820FAمسعودقیومیپژوهشکده زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی0000-0001-6685-1332فاطمهمحمدیپژوهشکده زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی0009-0009-2318-6630علیجهاندانشکده کامپیوتر، دانشگاه صنعتی امیرکبیرJournal Article20250718AbstractThe rise of digital communication tools, such as social networks and messaging platforms, has led to an expansion of diverse writing styles in Persian, including colloquial and non-standard (broken) forms. Converting such texts into standard Persian writing, especially based on the latest orthographic guidelines of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature, requires advanced natural language processing tools. This study compares the performance of five large language models, namely ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and DeepSeek, by automatically converting colloquial Persian into standard written form. The dataset utilized in this study is compiled and correct from two major corpora. A sub-corpus has been created through random sampling and resulted in 1,025 sentences and 11,939 tokens. Outputs from the models are compared to the gold standard annotations, focusing on both positive correction (e.g., correct use of pseudo-spaces, Ezafe, hamza, and standardizing informal forms) and negative errors (e.g., word replacement, deletion of clitics, and stylistic shifts). Findings indicate that the language model in Claude achieved the highest alignment with the gold standard (51.39%) at word and sentence levels, while Perplexity performed the worst. The results highlight that, despite their strengths, large language models still face challenges in accurately standardizing Persian text based on the formal orthographic conventions.1. IntroductionThe widespread adoption of digital communication technologies, such as messaging applications and social media platforms, has significantly expanded public participation in written communication. As a result, diverse forms of writing have emerged, reflecting the linguistic practices of users from various educational, social, and cultural backgrounds. In Persian, this trend has led to the increasing use of non-standard and colloquial writing styles that closely mirror everyday speech rather than established orthographic conventions. While these forms demonstrate the dynamism and creativity of language in digital environments and provide valuable material for linguistic research, they pose challenges when the conversion of such texts into standardized writing is required. Therefore, the normalization of non-standard texts according to the official orthographic guidelines established by the Academy of Persian Language and Literature is of both practical and scholarly importance.The emergence of Large Language Models (LLM) since 2020 has provided new possibilities for processing and standardizing Persian writing. These models, relying on deep learning and extensive text data, have the ability to convert non-standard and colloquial writing styles into standard writing. This paper contributes to convert non-standard spelling varieties into the standard ones by using LLM tools and to measure the degree to which the LLMs’ output conforms to formal writing. To this end, the present study evaluates the performance of five LLM tools, including ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and DeepSeek. The conversion is compared with the latest version of orthographic guidelines of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature (2023). The results of this research can be effective in understanding the capacities and limitations of LLMs and evaluating their role in standardizing Persian writing in the digital space.Research Question(s)How the performance of the LLM tools is comparable to convert a colloquial and non-standard texts into standard ones?2. Literature ReviewThere are a number of domestic and international research on the automatic conversion of colloquial or non-standard texts into standard ones. To this end, investigations show that sequential machine translation (Mansfield et al., 2019; Arora and Kansal, 2020), deep neural models, rule-based methods (Ariffin & Tiun, 2020), and statistical approaches are the most important solutions used in this field. International studies in English, Malay (Arora & Kansal, 2020), Kazakh (Kozhirbayev & Yessenbayev, 2020) and medical texts (Liu et al., 2021) have reported that the use of sub-words, encoder-decoder networks, BERT-based models, and combining rules with machine learning can significantly increase the accuracy of standardization and improve the performance of natural language processing systems, including sentiment analysis (Arora & Kansal, 2020) and grammatical labeling (Ariffin & Tiun, 2020). In Persian, from the rule-based methods (Armin and Shamsfard, 2010) to transformer-based deep learning models (Rasooli et al., 2020; AbdiKhojasteh et al., 2020; Adibian & Momtazi, 2022), extensive efforts have been made to convert colloquial and non-standard texts into the standard ones. In addition to designing automatic converters, such as a spell-checker (Tajalli et al., 2023), these studies have focused on collecting parallel formal-informal corpora, using crowdsourcing to generate data (Masoumi et al., 2020) and analyze the features of rewriting in social networks (Ghayoomi & Mesgarkhoyi, 2023). The results show that a large part of cyberspace words are compatible with the standard spelling, but broken writing remains as a serious challenge. Overall, the available evidence suggests that combining large data sets, standard script, and modern deep learning models can provide an effective path for the automatic standardization of Persian writing and the improvement of natural language processing tools.3. MethodologyTo achieve the research goals, the web version of the LLM tools, including ChatGPT, Gemini, Perplexity, Claude, and DeepSeek, are used to exploit their latest features and capabilities. The input of the tools is non-standard spelling of Persian and it is expected to be converted into standard spelling rules by the tools. To evaluate the performance, the gold standard labels of the input is required. To this end, two Persian corpora containing colloquial and non-standard Persian texts, prepared by Masoumi et al. (2020) and Tajali et al. (2023), are used. The first corpus contains 4500 sentences and the second one contains 50,011 sentences. By concatenating the two corpora, a corpus with 54,511 sentences and 584,418 words is obtained. Due to the limitations of using web versions of LLM tools, 1025 sentences are randomly selected from the combined corpus, which includes 11,939 tokens and 4016 type words. After comparing the output of the input with the gold standard labels, the changes, either corrections or mistakes, are manually categorized by experts into “positive” or “negative” categories. The “positive” performance includes:1) Inserting the Ezafe clitic as “ی” /ye/, such as “خانه ما” /xāne.ye ma/ ‘our home’ which becomes “خانهی ما”;2) Inserting the Ezafe clitic as “ ۀ ” /ye/, such as “خانه ما” /xāne.ye ma/ ‘our home’ which becomes “خانۀ ما”;3) Inserting the pseudo-space, such as “ساقه هایش” /sāqe hāyaš/ ‘its stalks’ which becomes “ساقههایش”;4) Correctly inserting the hamza, such as “تاثیر” /ta?sir/ ‘impact’ which becomes “تأثیر”;5) Correctly inserting the tanvin, such as “کلا” /kollan/ ‘generally’ which becomes “کلاً”;6) Correctly converting the colloquial and non-standard writing into the standard form, such as “دستتون” /dastetun/ ‘your hand’ which becomes “دستتان” /dastetān/;7) Correctly inserting the mediating consonants, such as “توش” /tuš/ ‘in it’ which becomes “تویش” /tuyaš/;8) Correcting the spelling or unintentional errors in writing words, such as “ینی” /yani/ ‘meaning’, which becomes “یعنی”;9) Substituting the standard spelling for fancy writing, such as “عسیس” /?asis/ ‘dear’, which becomes “عزیز” /?aziz/.The negative changes in the model output that are not consistent with the gold standard labels are as follow:1) Changing the word order in a sentence, such as the sentence “بیا دوست باشیم دیگر” /biyā dust bāšim digar/ ‘Let's be friends’ which can be changed to “بیا دیگر دوست باشیم”;2) Replacing a word, such as changing “مگر” /mage/ ‘unless’ to “آیا”/?āyā/ [the question word for yes/no questions];3) Deleting clitics and replacing them with the corresponding simple word, such as “خودشانند” /xodešānand/ ‘they are themselves’, which can be changed to “خودشان هستند” /xodešān hastand/;4) Not converting colloquial or non-standard texts into the standard one, such as “یه” /ye/ ‘one’, whose correct form is “یک” /yek/ but without a conversion, no changes have been done;5) Incorrect insertion of Ezafe, such as “مجسمههای” /moǰassamehāye/ ‘statues’ which is incorrectly changed to “مجسمۀهای”;6) Incorrect insertion of pseudo-space, such as “برایتان” /barāyetān/ ‘for you’ while the correct writing is “برایتان”;7) Deleting a word, such as “ماروپلهاش رو بازی کنه” /māropelle?as ro bāzi kone/ ‘he/she plays his snake and ladder game’ which can be converted “ماروپلهاش بازی کنه”. In this example, “رو” /ro/ which is the correct form of “را” /rā/, is deleted from the sentence;8) Inserting a new word, such as “میخواستم بروم داخل” /mixāstam beravam dāxel/ ‘I wanted to enter’ which is converted into “میخواستم بروم به داخل” /mixāstam beravam be dāxel/ ‘I wanted to enter to’. In the conversion the preposition “به” /be/ ‘to’ is added;9) Inserting a space incorrectly, such as “اون که” /?un ke/ ‘one that’ which is changed to “آنکه” /?ānke/ while the correct form is ‘آن که’;10) No insertion of a proper space, such as “توهم” /toham/ ‘you too’, while the correct form is “تو هم” /to ham/;11) Replacing the wrong word, such as “تو” /tu/ ‘in’ in the example “تو خانه” ‘at home’ which is converted into “در خانه” /dar xāne/In general, any change that causes the text to deviate from the expected standard and correct form falls into this category of negative errors. 4. ResultsAccording to the obtained results in Table 1, GPT and Perplexity performed the most and the least positive and negative impacts at the word level, respectively. The most positive impact of the language models had been made by Claude, and Perplexity performed the worst. DeepSeek, GPT, and Gemini stay in the second to fourth ranks, respectively. Among the positive changes, inserting a pseudo-space had the most impact in converting non-standard text to standard. Inserting the Ezafe clitic applied the least change to non-standard data. Furthermore, according to the negative impacts of the LLM tools on the data, Perplexity and GPT applied the least and the most negative impact, respectively. Among the negative changes, the conversion of colloquial or broken writing to standard writing had the most negative changes, such that Perplexity had the least and Claude had the most changes. Inserting a wrong hamza had the least negative effect on data conversion. In this category, DeepSeek and Gemini did not have any negative effect on data conversion. Word substitution was the most negative change applied by GPT. Table 1distribution of positive and negative changes of LLMs in sample data at the word level GPTGeminiPerplexityClaudeDeepSeekPositive12.3611.496.4815.4014.44Negative34.1317.5014.1223.1322.48Next, we examined the performance of the LLM tools against the gold standard data in terms of exact matching at the sentence level for the input and output data. The results are reported in Table1. Based on the results, Claude obtained the highest matching rate (%51.39) and Perplexity the lowest matching rate (%90.7) with the gold standard data at the sentence level. The other language models, namely DeepSeek, Gemini, and GPT, ranked second to fourth respectively among the models. In examining LLMs with each other, without considering the gold standard data, it was concluded that Claude and DeepSeek perform similarly, and GPT and Perplexity had the lowest performance.Table 2comparing performance of LLMs with gold standard data at the sentence level GoldGPTGeminiPerplexityClaudeDeepSeekGPT98Gemini24484Perplexity8147183Claude40513629397DeepSeek337118231108368In the further studying the performances of LLMs, the models were compared from the perspective of syntax. First, the sentences obtained from LLMs and the gold standard data were part-of-speech tagged. Then, the content and functional words were separated from each other and the performances of the models were compared. The gold standard data contained %50.76 of content words and %50.23 of functional words. The results of the analysis are reported in Table 3. Based on the results obtained, Claude and Perplexity were able to obtain the largest and smallest volume of content and functional words, respectively. The ratio of content word changes in GPT (70.29%) was higher than other models, while Claude had decreased this ratio to %67.73. The ratio of functional word change in comparing GPT (%29.71) and Claude (%32.27) was the opposite such that Claude had a better performance in converting non-standard functional words into standard ones.Table 3distribution of content and functional words in LLMs compared to gold standard dataContent wordFunctional wordGPT4.851.44Gemini14.334.42Perplexity4.001.32Claude25.238.14DeepSeek21.156.845. ConclusionThe general conclusion that can be drawn from the present study is that the difference in the results obtained from different LLMs indicates that due to the difference in their algorithms and training data of the models, the difference in their performance is obvious. Therefore, it is not possible to choose a single LLM and limit a research to that model. In a comprehensive study, it is necessary to examine various LLMs. Examining the differences can be a guide to choose the right tool in future research.BibliographyAbdiKhojasteh, H., Ansari, E., & Bohlouli, M. (2020). LSCP: Enhanced large scale colloquial Persian language understanding. Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Marseille, France: European Language Resources Association, pp. 6323–6327.Academy of Persian Language and Literature (2023). The Approved Orthography Rules of the Academy of Persian Language and Literature. Tehran: Persian Language and Literature Academy. [In Persian]Adibian, M., & Momtazi, S. (2012). Converting Persian colloquial text to formal text using neural networks based on converters. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 18(35), 45–67. [In Persian]Armin, N., & Shamsfard, M. (2010). Converting Persian colloquial text to formal text using n-grams. Proceedings of the 16th Annual National Conference of the Iranian Computer Association. [In Persian]Ariffin, S. N. A. N., & Tiun, S. (2020). Rule-based text normalization for Malay social media texts. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11.Arora, M., & Kansal, V. (2020). Character level embedding with deep convolutional neural network for text normalization of unstructured data for Twitter sentiment analysis. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 11.Ghayoomi, M., & Mesgarkhoyi, M. (2023). Analysis of the corpus of Persian language data in cyberspace. Language and Linguistics, 19, 37: 117–136. [In Persian]Kozhirbayev, Z., & Yessenbayev, Z. (2020). Kazakh text normalization using machine translation approaches. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2780.Liu, Y., Ji, B., Yu, J., Tan, Y., Ma, J., & Wu, Q. (2021). An advanced ICD-9 terminology standardization method based on BERT and text similarity. Advances in Natural Computation, Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery. ICNC-FSKD 2020. Lecture Notes on Data Engineering and Communications Technologies, eds. Meng, H., Lei, T., Li, M., Li, K., Xiong, N., & Wang, L., Speringer, vol. 88, pp. 1868–1879.Mansfield, C., Sun, M., Liu, Y., Gandhe, A., & Hoffmeister, B. (2019). Neural text normalization with subword units. Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, eds. Loukina, A., Morales, M., & Kumar, R., Minneapolis, Minnesota: Association for Computational Linguistics, vol. 2, pp. 190–196.Masoumi, V., Salehi, M., Veisi, H., Haddadian, G., Ranjbar, V., & Sahebdel, M. (2020). TeleCrowd: A crowdsourcing approach to create informal to formal text corpora. Arxiv.https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.11771.Rasooli, M. S., Bakhtyari, F., Shafiei, F., Ravanbakhsh, M., & Callison-Burch, C. (2020). Automatic standardization of colloquial Persian. Arxiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2012.05879Tajalli, V., Kalantari, F., & Shamsfard, M. (2023). Developing an informal formal Persian corpus. Arxiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.05336.رشد ارتباطات دیجیتال، مانند شبکههای اجتماعی و پیامرسانها، موجب گسترش شکلهای متنوعی از نوشتار در زبان فارسی، ازجمله گفتارینویسی و شکستهنویسی، شدهاست. تبدیل این گونههای نوشتاری به نوشتار معیار، بهویژه براساس دستور خط مصوب فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی، نیازمند بهرهگیری از ابزارهای پیشرفته پردازش زبان طبیعی است. در پژوهش حاضر، عملکرد پنج مدل زبانی بزرگ شامل ChatGPT، Gemini، Perplexity، Claudeو DeepSeek در تبدیل خودکار گفتارینویسی فارسی به نوشتار معیار براساس دستور خط مصوب ارزیابی شدهاست. دادههای پژوهش از اصلاح و ترکیب دو پیکرۀ حاصل از فضای مجازی حاصل شده و بهصورت تصادفی یک زیرپیکره شامل ۱۰۲۵ جمله که حاوی ۱۱۹۳۹ واژه است تهیه شدهاست. تحلیل خروجی مدلها بر مبنای برچسبهای طلایی معیار و با تمرکز بر تغییرات مثبت (مانند درج نیمفاصله، کسرۀ اضافه، همزه و اصلاح شکستهنویسی) و تغییرات منفی (مانند حذف واژهبست، جایگزینی واژه و تغییر سبک و جابهجایی واژهها) انجام شدهاست. نتایج نشان میدهد مدل Claude با بیشترین تطابق با برچسب طلایی (51/39٪) در سطح واژه و جمله عملکرد بهتر و Perplexity ضعیفترین عملکرد را از این منظر داشتهاست. این پژوهش نشان میدهد که مدلهای زبانی بزرگ، علیرغم توانایی بالا، همچنان با چالشهایی در معیارسازی نوشتار فارسی، بهویژه در رعایت دقیق دستور خط، مواجهاست.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14059_3b87a374bf05212831dde204637f56cb.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Investigation and Comparison of the Grammatical Profile of Persian-Speaking Hearing-Impaired Children with Hearing Childrenبررسی و مقایسۀ کنش دستوری بیانی در کودکان کمشنوای فارسیزبان و همتایان شنوای آنها1331561406010.30465/lsi.2026.53154.1829FAحوریهاحدیدانشیار، گروه زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایرانJournal Article20251025AbstractAuditory function is fundamental to natural language development, and its impairment can lead to serious disorders in grammar acquisition. This descriptive-analytical field study aimed to delineate the grammatical profile of Persian-speaking hearing-impaired children and compare it with hearing peers using a standardized test. The statistical population comprised hearing-impaired children from Baghcheban schools in Tehran, from which 10 second-grade hearing-impaired children were selected as the experimental group and 10 hearing children as the control group via convenience sampling. The research instrument was the standardized "Grammatical Expression" test by Haresabadi et al. (2016), comprising 40 items assessing 20 grammatical structures. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the non-parametric Mann-Whitney test. Results demonstrated a significant difference between groups in overall grammatical expression. Specifically, hearing-impaired children exhibited the greatest difficulties in complex syntactic structures, including adverbial relative clauses, causative constructions, and contrastive pronouns. They also showed substantial weaknesses in inflectional categories such as verb tense, mood, aspect, verb agreement, and attached pronouns. These findings clearly indicate a considerably weaker grammatical profile in hearing-impaired children compared to hearing peers. This weakness was particularly evident in complex syntactic structures and inflectional categories. The results strongly emphasize the necessity of designing early, targeted, and intensive speech therapy interventions that focus on explicit instruction of these challenging structures. Such interventions can significantly reduce the linguistic gap and improve communication skills in these children.1. IntroductionAuditory perception constitutes a fundamental prerequisite for natural language acquisition, and any impairment in this sensory modality during critical developmental periods can result in significant linguistic deficits, particularly within the grammatical domain (Paul et al., 2013). Classical investigations have consistently demonstrated that children with hearing impairment exhibit notable constraints in sentence length and structural complexity, predominantly employing simple subject-verb-object constructions while demonstrating limited use of compound sentences and subordinate clauses (Goda, 1959; Heider & Heider, 1940; Quigley et al., 1974; Simmons, 1965.).Typological differences between languages underscore the importance of independent investigation within each linguistic context. In Persian, several studies have reported significant weaknesses in language skills among hearing-impaired children compared to hearing peers (Lotfi et al., 2009; Rahgozar et al., 2009). Although cochlear implantation leads to improvements, performance remains below hearing peers (Mohseni Ezhiyeh et al., 2015). At the grammatical level, hearing-impaired children use simpler structures, fewer inflectional morphemes, and shorter sentences (Salmani et al., 2021; Shariat Razavi et al., 1998). Analysis of spontaneous speech reveals inappropriate omission of grammatical elements (Zarifian et al., 2012). Most Persian-language studies have relied on spontaneous speech samples (Golpour et al., 2007; Shariat Razavi et al., 1998; Zarifian et al., 2012) due to the absence of a standardized test for comprehensive assessment of Persian grammar in hearing-impaired children. Given the language-specific nature of grammatical errors, it is imperative to examine the grammatical profile of hearing-impaired children using standardized Persian instruments. The present study was conducted to address this gap.Research QuestionsThe present study addressed three research questions: (1) Is there a significant difference between the overall grammatical expression performance of Persian-speaking hearing-impaired children and their hearing peers?(2) In which specific grammatical structures do hearing-impaired children demonstrate the most significant difficulties? (3) What is the grammatical profile of Persian-speaking hearing-impaired children as measured by a standardized Persian language test?2. Literature ReviewCross-linguistic research confirms persistent syntactic challenges in hearing-impaired children. Fujiyoshi et al. (2012) documented delays in complex Japanese structures until age 12, while Kawar (2021) reported fewer compound sentences and more morphological errors in Arabic. Taylor (1969) and Cooper (1967) showed hearing-impaired children acquire nominal/verbal structures before functional categories, with deaf adolescents performing at the level of 9-10-year-old hearing children. English studies (Schouwers et al., 2005; Volpato, 2009) revealed tense inflection weaknesses. Szagun (2004) found syntactic agreement errors in German, while Tur-Kaspa and Dromi (1998) and Szterman and Friedmann (2024) documented number/gender agreement errors in Hebrew. Klieve et al. (2023) confirmed morphological-syntactic challenges exceed lexical difficulties. Italian research documented difficulties with free morphological elements (Caselli et al., 2012; Chilosi et al., 2013; Giustolisi et al., 2021; Soleymani et al., 2016). Persian studies confirm simpler structures, fewer inflections, and inappropriate omissions (Amiri Shavaki et al., 2016; Golpour et al., 2007; Mohseni Ezhiyeh et al., 2015; Nikrosh et al., 2023; Salmani et al., 2021; Shariat Razavi et al., 1998; Valizadeh et al., 2015; Zarifian et al., 2012).3. MethodologyThis descriptive-analytical field study included 10 Persian-speaking monolingual hearing-impaired second-grade elementary children from Baghcheban schools in Tehran as the experimental group, and 10 monolingual hearing peers from regular schools as the control group, selected via convenience sampling. Inclusion criteria for the hearing-impaired group were: enrollment in Baghcheban elementary schools, cochlear implantation before age two, monolingual Persian speaking, and informed consent. Exclusion criteria were: concomitant disabilities, multilingualism, and lack of cooperation. The research instrument was the standardized "Grammatical Expression" test (Haresabadi et al., 2016), comprising 40 items assessing 20 different grammatical structures. Children were individually tested in a quiet room using a picture album. The Mann-Whitney non-parametric test was employed to compare group means.4. ResultsThe hearing group demonstrated significantly higher mean scores in both "correct expression of grammatical items" (95.10% vs. 64.25%) and "correct expression of grammatical structures" (91.15% vs. 51.50%). The hearing-impaired group exhibited marked difficulties, with the lowest mean scores for contrastive pronouns (20%), adverbial relative clauses (30%), causative structures (30%), and attached pronouns (42.5%). The Mann-Whitney test revealed significant differences between groups in overall grammatical expression scores (Z=-3.16, p=0.002; Z=-3.26, p=0.001). At the subtest level, significant differences (p<0.05) were observed for subject relative clauses, adverbial relative clauses, copular verbs, verb agreement, tense/aspect/mood, attached pronouns, contrastive pronouns, prepositions, comparative/superlative adjectives, and causative structures.5. DiscussionThe findings clearly demonstrate that Persian-speaking hearing-impaired children exhibit a significantly weaker grammatical profile compared to their hearing peers, particularly in complex syntactic structures and inflectional categories. These results align with international research documenting persistent syntactic delays (Caselli et al., 2012; Fujiyoshi et al., 2012; Kawar, 2021). The difficulties observed in relative clauses and causative constructions reflect challenges with hierarchical syntactic relationships (Quigley et al., 1974). The weaknesses in inflectional categories corroborate findings by Schouwers and colleagues (2005) and Volpato (2009), suggesting that limited auditory input constrains morphological processing. The significant difference in preposition use aligns with reports by Szagun (2004) and Tur-Kaspa and Dromi (1998). Theoretically, these findings support Taylor's (1969) generative framework, wherein hearing-impaired children rely on simpler structures before mastering functional categories. The substantial individual variation likely reflects differences in rehabilitation quality and timing.6. ConclusionThe findings provide compelling evidence that Persian-speaking hearing-impaired children possess a grammatical profile significantly inferior to their hearing peers, particularly in complex syntactic structures and inflectional categories. The results underscore the necessity of early, targeted, and intensive speech therapy interventions focusing on explicit instruction of these challenging structures. Limitations include the small sample size (n=10) and focus on a single grade level. Future research should employ larger samples across broader age ranges and conduct longitudinal studies to trace grammatical development.BibliographyAmiri Shavaki, Y., Zamani Rad, M., Jalaie, S., & Kamali, M. (2016). Grammatical verb errors in the writing of Persian-speaking adults with severe and profound hearing loss. Journal of Disability Studies, 6(1), 317-324.Caselli, M. C., Rinaldi, P., Varuzza, C., Giuliani, A., & Burdo, S. (2012). Cochlear implant in the second year of life: Lexical and grammatical outcomes. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55(2), 382-394.Chilosi, A. M., Comparini, A., Scusa, M. F., Orazini, L., Forli, F., Cipriani, P., & Berrettini, S. (2013). A longitudinal study of lexical and grammar development in deaf Italian children provided with early cochlear implantation. Ear and Hearing, 34(2), 28-37.Cooper, R. L. (1967). The ability of deaf and hearing children to apply morphological rules. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 10(1), 77-86.De Stefano, P., Pisani, F., & Cossu, G. (2019). Diverse linguistic development in prelingually deaf children with cochlear implants. Behavioural Neurology,1, 1630718.Fujiyoshi, A., Fukushima, K., Shiroma, M., et al. (2012). Syntactic development in Japanese hearing-impaired children. Annals of Otology, Rhinology & Laryngology, 121(4), 28-34Giustolisi, B., Guasti, M. T., Nicastri, M., Mancini, P., Palma, S., Genovese, E., & Arosio, F. (2021). Production of third-person direct object clitics in children with cochlear implants speaking Italian. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 35(6), 577-591.Goda, S. (1959). Language skills of profoundly deaf adolescent children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 2(4), 369-376.Golpour, L., Nilipour, R., & Roshan, B. (2007). Comparative analysis of some morphological-syntactic structures in the speech of 4–5-year-old Persian-speaking hearing-impaired and normal children. Audiology, 15(2), 23-29.Haresabadi, F., Ebadi, A., Shirazi, T. S., & Dastjerdi Kazemi, M. (2016). Design and validation of a Photographic Expressive Persian Grammar Test for children aged 4-6 years. Child Language Teaching and Therapy, 32(2), 193-204.Hawker, K., Ramirez-Inscoe, J., Bishop, D. V. M., Twomey, T., O'Donoghue, G. M., & Moore, D. R. (2008). Disproportionate language impairment in children using cochlear implants. Ear and Hearing, 29(3), 467-471.Heider, F. K., & Heider, G. M. (1940). Studies in the psychology of the deaf. Psychological Monographs, 53(5), i-48.Kawar, K. (2021). Morphology and syntax in Arabic-speaking adolescents who are deaf and hard of hearing. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 64(10), 3867-3882.Klieve, S., Eadie, P., Graham, L., & Leitão, S. (2023). Complex language use in children with hearing loss: A scoping review. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 66(2), 688-719.Lotfi, Y., Zarifian, T., Mehrakian, S., & Rahgozar, M. (2009). Linguistic characteristics of preschool hearing-impaired children in Tehran. Audiology, 18(1), 88-97.Mohseni Ezhiyeh, A. R., Faramarzi, S., Abtahi, S. H. R., Sepehrnejad, M., & Nilforoush, M. H. (2015). Investigation and comparison of language development in cochlear implanted children and children with normal hearing. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences, 11(2), 123.Nikrosh, E., Gheitouri, A., & Tafkari Rezaei, S. (2023). Differentiation of inflectional and derivational processes in Persian-speaking deaf individuals. Linguistic Research: Theory and Application, 2(1), 105-123.Paul, P. V., Wang, Y., & Williams, C. (2013). Deaf students and the qualitative similarity hypothesis: Understanding language and literacy development. Gallaudet University Press.Quigley, S. P., Wilbur, R. B., & Montanelli, D. S. (1974). Question formation in the language of deaf students. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 17(4), 699-713.Rahgozar, M., Mehrakian, S., Zarifian, T., & Lotfi, Y. (2009). Investigating language characteristics of preschool hearing-impaired children in Tehran. Audiology, 18(1-2), 88-97.Salmani, M., Seyed, S., Moradi, S., Shirkvand, Z., Sadati, S., & Tabatabaei, M. S. (2021). Production of inflectional morphemes and clause and phrase structures of Persian language based on P-LARSP: A comparison of children with moderate hearing impairment and children with normal hearing. Journal of Rehabilitation, 22(4), 482-505.Schouwers, K., van Wieringen, A., & Gillis, S. (2005). The acquisition of finite verb morphology in Dutch-speaking children with a cochlear implant. Eurosla Yearbook, 5(1), 199-220.Shariat Razavi, E., Modaresi, Y., Shafiei, F., Azordegan, F., & Bani Hashemi, S. M. (1998). Grammatical skills of hearing-impaired children in deaf elementary schools of Tehran. Journal of Hearing and Vestibular Research, 5(1), 36-45Simmons, A. A. (1965). Language growth in deaf children. Volta Bureau.Soleymani, Z., Mahmoodabadi, N., & Nouri, M. M. (2016). Language skills and phonological awareness in children with cochlear implants and normal hearing. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 83, 16-21.Szagun, G. (2004). Learning by ear: On the acquisition of case and gender marking by German-speaking children with normal hearing and with cochlear implants. Journal of Child Language, 31, 1-30.Szterman, R., & Friedmann, N. (2024). Comprehension and production of sentences with V-C movement in orally. Rich Descriptions and Simple Explanations in Morphosyntax and Language Acquisition,12, 239.Taylor, L. T. (1969). A language analysis of the writing of deaf children. The Florida State University.Tur-Kaspa, H., & Dromi, E. (1998). Spoken and written language assessment of orally trained children with hearing loss: Syntactic structures and deviations. Volta Review, 100, 186-202.Valizadeh, A., Goheri, N., Fatehi, F., & Yavari, A. (2015). Comparison of some syntactic features of speech in high school students with hearing impairment. Journal of Paramedical Sciences and Rehabilitation, 4(4), 36-42.Volpato, F. (2009). The acquisition of relative clause and phi-features: Evidence from hearing and hearing impaired populations [Doctoral Thesi].Zarifian, T., Mohammadi, R., & Mahmoudi Bakhtiari, B. (2012). Comparative study of syntactic skills in Persian-speaking hearing-impaired and hearing preschool children. Journal of Research in Rehabilitation Sciences, 8(4), 659.حس شنوایی نقش محوری در رشد طبیعی زبان دارد و آسیب به آن میتواند به اختلالات جدی در اکتساب دستور زبان بینجامد. این پژوهش با هدف ترسیم نیمرخ دستوری کودکان کمشنوای فارسیزبان و مقایسه آن با کودکان شنوا با استفاده از یک آزمون استاندارد انجام شد. این مطالعه از نوع توصیفی-تحلیلی و با روش میدانی انجام گرفت. جامعه آماری شامل کودکان کمشنوای مدارس باغچهبان تهران بود که از میان آنها ۱۰ کودک کمشنوای پایه دوم ابتدایی بهعنوان گروه آزمایش و ۱۰ کودک شنوا به از مدارس عادی به عنوان گروه شاهد انتخاب شدند. ابزار پژوهش، آزمون استانداردشده «بیان دستوری» حارثآبادی و همکاران (۱۳۹۳) بود که شامل ۴۰ گویه برای سنجش ۲۰ ساختار دستوری مختلف است. دادهها با استفاده از آمار توصیفی و آزمون ناپارامتری من-ویتنی در نرمافزار SPSS تحلیل شدند. تحلیل دادهها نشان داد که بین عملکرد کلی دو گروه در حوزه بیان دستوری تفاوت معناداری وجود دارد. بهطور خاص، کودکان کمشنوا در کاربرد ساختارهای پیچیده نحوی مانند بندهای موصولی قیدی، ساخت سببی و ضمایر تقابلی و همچنین در مقولههای تصریفی مانند زمان، وجه و نمود فعل، شناسه فعل و ضمایر متصل بیشترین مشکل را نشان دادند. یافتهها حاکی از وجود نیمرخ دستوری بسیار ضعیفتر در کودکان کمشنوای فارسیزمان در مقایسه با همسالان شنوای آنهاست. این ضعف به طور ویژه در ساختارهای پیچیده نحوی و مقولههای تصریفی مشهود بود. نتایج بر لزوم طراحی و اجرای مداخلات زودهنگام، هدفمند و فشرده گفتاردرمانی که بهطور خاص بر آموزش صریح این ساختارها تمرکز داشته باشند، تأکید میکند. چنین مداخلاتی میتواند به کاهش شکاف زبانی و بهبود مهارتهای ارتباطی این کودکان کمک شایانی نماید.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14060_0fd48905c01efe57e06cef04e3d71038.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Duration vs. Weight-Based Vowel Reduction: The Interaction of the Economy and Least Effort Principles in the Kermani Varietyدیرش در برابر کاهش واکهای وزن ـ بنیاد؛ نمونهای از تعامل اصل اقتصاد و اصل کمکوشی در گونۀ کرمانی1571801406110.30465/lsi.2026.51588.1799FAانیسمعصومیدانشگاه علامه طباطبائی، تهران، ایران0000-0001-5931-4475Journal Article20250406Abstract This study examines the factors that inhibit vowel reduction in the Kermani variety of Persian. While vowel reduction in this variety is typically conditioned by syllable weight (occurring in monomoraic syllables), it fails to apply in certain phonetic contexts. One such context is adjacency to laryngeal consonants. Analysis reveals that laryngeal consonants, lacking a place of articulation feature and being produced outside the oral/nasal cavity, do not have a formant target. Consequently, the articulatory features of adjacent vowels remain unchanged, leading to their longer formant frequencies. Another context involves words that exhibit consonant gemination in Standard Persian. Acoustic evidence from the Kermani variety reveals that consonants are not geminated in this dialect; instead, the preceding short vowel undergoes lengthening. This observation suggests a phonological constraint in this variety that blocks consonant gemination, spreading the moraic weight to the short vowel and rendering it bimoraic. A common feature in both contexts is the prolonged articulatory stability of short vowels, which prevents undershoot, thereby inhibiting vowel reduction and preserving vowel contrasts. What we observe in this language variety is the interaction between the Principle of Least Effort and the Principle of Economy. In monomoraic syllables, the Principle of Least Effort derives the neutralization of vowel contrasts, whereas in heavier syllables, the Principle of Economy preserves contrasts by inhibiting neutralization.1. IntroductionVowel reduction—typically understood as the centralization of unstressed vowels toward schwa—has been widely examined across languages such as English (Chomsky & Halle, 1968). However, cross-linguistic evidence demonstrates that vowel reduction can also be conditioned by syllable weight rather than stress. In weight-based vowel reduction, vowels in monomoraic syllables tend to neutralize, while those in bimoraic syllables retain their quality (Crosswhite, 1999: 2004). Previous studies on the Kermani variety of Persian (Masoumi, 2021) revealed such a weight-based process: short vowels /a/, /e/, and /o/ neutralize in open light syllables, surfacing as [ə], whereas long vowels /ɑ/, /i/, and /u/ remain unaffected. Yet, several contexts show unexpected inhibition of reduction, notably adjacent to laryngeal consonants (/ʔ, h/), and before consonants which are geminated in Standard Persian. This study aims to identify the phonetic and phonological constraints that block reduction in these contexts.2. Literature ReviewIn this section, we have two subsections regarding previous studies on weight-based reduction and gemination.2.1. Weight-based ReductionRegarding weight-based reduction, Crosswhite (2004) argues that this process depends on moraic structure, where short vowels in open syllables undergo centralization. Lindblom (1963) attributes this process to target undershoot, caused by limited articulatory time. The Kermani variety, as described by Masoumi (2021), presents a distinct weight-based vowel system in which schwa is not a phoneme but an allophonic outcome of monomoraic syllables.2.2. GeminationIn her study, Modarresi Ghavami (2026) classified Persian geminated consonants into two categories: a) those in originally Persian words, for which gemination is the result of synchronic / diachronic assimilation, compensatory lengthening, and emphasis. In these cases, gemination plays no contrastive role, and b) those in Arabic loanwords. Regarding phonetic, phonological, and morphological parameters suggested by Belvins (2005), Tabibzadeh (2024) implied that in Persian, duration of geminated consonants is significantly more than that of simple ones, which phonetically confirm the existence of gemination; however, no morphological and phonological role were detected for it. Analyzing Arabic data (Al-Tamimi & Khattab, 2015; Watson, 2002) indicated that gemination affects the temporal structure of preceding vowels, which are obligatorily short. 3. MethodologyTo determine the phonetic basis of reduction inhibition, two potential blocking environments were analyzed: a) adjacency to laryngeal consonants (/ʔ, h/), and b) vowels before consonants geminated in Standard Persian. Six native Kermani speakers (three female, three male) participated. Each speaker produced three repetitions of selected word pairs embedded in carrier sentences. Examples included /haɹif/ ‘rival’ vs. /ʃaɹif/ ‘noble’ for the laryngeal context, and /banɑ/ ‘building’ vs. /banːɑ/ ‘builder’, /coɹe/ ‘sphere’ vs. /coɹːe/ ‘foal’, /mɑdːe/ ‘substance’ vs. /mɑde/ ‘female’ for gemination contexts.Recordings were made and analyzed using Praat (Boersma & Weenik, 2023). Vowel and consonant segments were manually segmented and their durations extracted via Praat scripts. Statistical analyses were conducted in RStudio. Normality was checked with the Shapiro-Wilk test, homogeneity of variance with Levene’s test, and significant differences assessed with one-way ANOVA followed by pairwise comparisons (α = 0.05).4. ResultsFirst, Spectrographic analyses showed that in words beginning with laryngeal consonants, vowel formants were prolonged and stable, indicating minimal coarticulatory influence. In contrast, non-laryngeal onsets (e.g., /ʃ/) induced formant shifts and centralization of /a/ to [ə]. Thus, laryngeals preserve the vowel’s articulatory configuration and increase its duration. This articulatory transparency allows the adjacent vowel to retain its steady-state formant pattern for a longer interval; the situation which leads to the preservation of vowel quality and vowel reduction blockage.Second, regarding word pairs /banɑ/ ‘building’ vs. /banːɑ/ ‘builder’, /coɹe/ ‘sphere’ vs. /coɹːe/ ‘foal’, /mɑdːe/ ‘substance’ vs. /mɑde/ ‘female’, the Shapiro-Wilk and Levene’s tests showed a significance level greater than 0.05, which demonstrate a normal data distribution that satisfy the assumptions of ANOVA. In the next step, analyzing consonants, ANOVA results indicated no significant difference between duration of consonants in each word pair (p > 0.05):Table 1 One-way ANOVA results for consonants in word pairsVowelEqual Variances (Levene’s Test)Significance/n/0.901p-value: 0.678/ɹ/0.423p-value: 0.592/d/0.841p-value: 0.612So, there is no evidence for gemination of consonants in this language variety. For vowels, however, significant differences were found in the duration of short vowels preceding those consonants which are geminated in Standard Persian:Table 2One-way ANOVA results for vowels in word pairsVowelEqual Variances (Levene’s Test)Significance/a/0.421p-value: 0.000/o/0.387p-value: 0.000/ɑ/0.312p-value: 0.592Pairwise comparisons confirmed that /a/ and /o/ were significantly longer in /bannɑ/ and /coɹɹe/ than in /banɑ/ and /coɹe/. However, no significant difference was found for /ɑ/. 5. Discussion The results demonstrate two independent yet convergent mechanisms that prevent vowel reduction in Kermani.First, laryngeal consonants (/ʔ, h/) lack supralaryngeal place features and therefore have no specific formant target (Keating, 1988; Bessell, 1992). This articulatory transparency allows the adjacent vowel to retain its steady-state formant pattern for a longer interval. Following Lindblom (1963), the absence of temporal pressure reduces the likelihood of target undershoot, thereby maintaining vowel quality. Bibbs (2022) and Flemming (1995) similarly note that languages tend to preserve contrasts whenever sufficient perceptual cues are available.Second, the Kermani data reveal a phonological constraint regarding gemination of consonants. The absence of gemination triggers compensatory lengthening of the preceding short vowel, effectively transferring moraic weight from the consonant to the vowel (Hayes, 1989). This process parallels observations in Sanskrit, where geminate /r/ is disallowed and compensatory lengthening applies (Kavitskaya, 2001; Whitney, 1886). The Kermani pattern thus reflects a mora-preservation mechanism, aligning with Lehiste’s (1970) notion of inverse proportionality between vowel and consonant quantity.In both contexts studied in this study, increased vowel duration is the shared property. The longer steady-state phase prevents centralization and retains underlying vowel contrasts. From a theoretical perspective, these findings exemplify the dynamic balance between the Principle of Least Effort and the Principle of Economy (Zipf, 1949). The Principle of Least Effort favors articulatory simplification through reduction, particularly in light syllables where minimal effort suffices. Conversely, the Principle of Economy preserves contrasts by preventing unnecessary neutralization in contexts where temporal or perceptual conditions allow for efficient maintenance of distinctions. The Kermani variety thus optimizes both articulatory and communicative efficiency within its prosodic system.6. ConclusionThis study offers a comprehensive explanation for why vowel reduction, though fundamentally weight-based in the Kermani variety, is inhibited in specific phonetic environments. Acoustic evidence shows that laryngeal consonants increase adjacent vowel duration by virtue of their articulatory transparency, while prohibited consonant gemination results in mora transfer and vowel lengthening. Both mechanisms enhance the stability of short vowels and prevent undershoot, thereby preserving vowel contrasts. The Kermani data support a phonetically constraint-based model of vowel reduction in which duration and syllable weight jointly determine reduction outcomes. More broadly, these findings illustrate how dialectal phonetic systems manifest the tension between economy of effort and economy of contrast. While light syllables favor reduction through least effort, heavy syllables invoke the economy principle to preserve distinctions essential to intelligibility. Bibliography Bibbs, R. L. (2022). Perceptual factors license vocalic contrasts in Chamorro. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 7(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1234Blevins, J. (2004). Evolutionary phonology: The emergence of sound patterns. Cambridge University Press.Cohn, A. (2003). Phonological structure and phonetic duration: The role of the mora. Working Papers of the Cornell Phonetics Laboratory, 15, 69-100.Crosswhite, K. (1999). Vowel reduction in Optimality Theory [Doctoral dissertation, Los Angeles: University of California]. Flemming, E. S. (1995). Auditory representations in phonology [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles].Hayes, B. (1989). Compensatory lengthening in moraic phonology. Linguistic Inquiry, 20(2), 253-306. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4178626Kavitskaya, D. (2001). Compensatory lengthening: phonetics, phonology, diachrony [Doctoral dissertation, Berkeley, University of California].Modarresi Ghavami, G. (2026). Gemination in Modern Spoken Persian. In A. Korangy and R. Falahati (eds). Springer handbook of phonetics and phonology of modern Iranian languages (pp. 11-30). Singapore: Springer Nature.در پژوهش حاضر به بررسی علّل رخندادن کاهش واکهای در گونۀ کرمانی از زبان فارسی پرداخته شد. کاهش واکهای در این گونۀ زبانی به وزن هجا بستگی دارد و در مواردی که هجا تکمورایی باشد رخ میدهد. باوجوداین، در برخی از بافتهای آوایی شاهد کاهشنیافتن واکهها هستیم. یکی از این دو بافت در مجاورت همخوانهای چاکنایی است. بررسی همخوانهای چاکنایی نشان داد که این همخوانها بهدلیل فاقدجایگاهبودن و تولیدنشدن در مجرای دهان و بینی فاقد سازۀ هدف هستند و سازههای واکۀ مجاور در هنگام تولید آنها تغییری نمیکند. این مسئله منجر به دیرش بیشتر سازههای واکه میشود. بافت دیگر در واژههایی است که در فارسی معیار همخوانی مشدد دارند. بررسی صوتشناختی این واژهها نشان داد که در گونۀ کرمانی در این واژهها همخوان مشدد نیست و این واکۀ کوتاه پیش از آن است که کشیدهتر تولید میشود. درواقع، محدودیتی بر نظام واجی این گونۀ زبانی حاکم است که مانع از مشددشدن همخوانها میشود. از این رو، وزن مضاعف همخوان در این واژهها به واکۀ کوتاه منتقل شده و واکه دومورایی میشود. آنچه در دو بافت مذکور مشترک است ثبات وضعیت تولیدی واکههای کوتاه برای مدت زمانی بیشتر است. این مسئله مانع از رخداد گریز از هدف میشود و در نتیجه، کاهش واکهای رخ نمیدهد و تقابل میان واکهها حفظ شود. آنچه در این گونۀ زبانی شاهد آن هستیم، تعامل میان دو اصل کمکوشی و اصل اقتصاد است. در هجاهای تکمورایی شاهد عملکرد اصل کمکوشی و ازمیانرفتن تقابلها هستیم، امّا در هجاهای سنگینتر اصل اقتصاد مانع از خنثیشدن تقابلها میشود.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14061_a9dab015b5ebf6fce8c88e0d387c057d.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Farrokhi Dictionary; An Unknown Lexicon in the Subcontinentفرهنگ فرخی؛ فرهنگی ناشناخته در شبهقاره1812021406410.30465/lsi.2026.51903.1808FAعباسبگجانیفرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی، گروه فرهنگنویسی0000-0002-5381-8127زهراجعفریگروه فرهنگنویسی، فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی، تهران، ایران0009-0002-5676-3413Journal Article20250510Abstract The Farrokhi Dictionary is among the lesser-known Persian lexicons, compiled in 1245 AH in the Indian subcontinent. The author of this dictionary is Moḥyī al-Dīn Nā’eṭi, known as Pattūr, about whose life we have little information. The dictionary itself has not been properly studied, and the scant information available about it is mostly inaccurate. Farrokhi Dictionary has not yet been published; its only known manuscript was previously kept in the Fort William College collection and is now preserved in the National Archives of India. This copy was transcribed in 1249 AH by Mohammad Abbas, pen-named Makhmoor. The brief introduction of the Farrokhi Dictionary is divided into five “methods”: the alphabet; the meanings of the letters and how they are transformed into one another; pronouns; meanings of prepositions, suffixes, and prefixes; and the method of collecting, compiling, and organizing the dictionary’s content. Moḥyī al-Dīn, while criticizing the common approaches of earlier lexicographers in categorizing entries, has arranged his own entries in alphabetical order. These entries are defined very concisely, and the meanings are listed sequentially without any textual evidence or citations. The primary sources used in the Farrokhi Dictionary, in order of usage, are Farhang-e Jahāngīrī, Montakhab al-Lughat-e Shāhjahānī, and Kashf al-Lughat wa al-Iṣṭilāḥāt. The Farrokhi Dictionary itself has served as a source for Āṣaf al-Lughat. The purpose of this article is to examine the Farrokhi Dictionary from various perspectives and to present new information about it.1. IntroductionThis study introduces and critically examines Farrokhi Dictionary, one of the lesser-known Persian dictionaries compiled in the Indian subcontinent in 1245 AH. Relying on the only known version of the work, the authors have corrected some incorrect information in previous lists and sources, examined the author's life, the features of the version, the structure, and the content of the dictionary. They have also shown, by carefully comparing the entries of Farrokhi Dictionary with previous dictionaries, that this work was compiled mainly on the basis of Farhang-e Jahāngīrī, Montakhab al-Lughat-e Shāhjahānī, and some other sources (Anjū Shīrāzī, 1351; Tatavī, 1340). The results of the study clarify the place of Farrokhi Dictionary in the history of Persian dictionary writing in the subcontinent (Ṣādeqī, 1393; Rādfar, 1329).2. Literature ReviewThe present study is in line with studies on the history of Persian lexicography in the subcontinent. The authors have shown that although the general aspects of Persian lexicography in India and Pakistan and its development have been examined in numerous works (Naqavī, 1341/1962; Ṣādeqī, 1393/2014), Farrokhi Dictionary has not been known as it should be, and the available information about it has been scanty and often inaccurate. The only previous references to this work are in the introduction of its manuscript and some bibliographical reports (Hāshempour Sobḥānī & Naṣīrī, 1379/2000; Perti, 1989). Therefore, there was no room for an independent study to introduce the author, manuscript, sources, structure, and position of this dictionary in the Persian lexicography tradition.3. MethodologyThe present study employs a descriptive-analytical and comparative methodology grounded in manuscript examination, content analysis, and textual comparison. First, the authors use the only known manuscript of Farrokhi Dictionary, preserved under no. 502 in the National Archives of India, as the primary source of investigation. They examine the manuscript’s codicological features, scribe, date of transcription, ownership notes, and physical characteristics in detail (Nā’eṭi, 1245/1966 AH: 1, p. 467; Hāshempour Sobḥānī & Naṣīrī, 1379/ 2000, p. 38). Additional bibliographical and manuscript-catalogue sources are consulted to verify information concerning the manuscript and its scribe (Derāyatī, 1390/2011, pp. 24/711, 27/376; Perti, 1989, p. 41).In the next stage, the structure and content of the dictionary are analyzed through a close reading of the manuscript itself. The authors identify and evaluate the preface, arrangement of entries, methods of definition, approximate number of headwords, and the compiler’s views on lexicography (Nā’eṭi, 1245 AH: 2–10). To determine the sources used by Nā’eṭi, statements made in the preface are systematically compared with the actual content of the entries (Nā’eṭi, 1245 AH: 10).The core of the research consists of a comparative analysis of Farrokhi Dictionary and earlier lexicographical works, particularly Farhang-e Jahāngīrī, Montakhab al-Lughat-e Shāhjahānī, and Kashf al-Lughat wa al-Iṣṭilāḥāt. By selecting numerous sample entries and comparing them closely with corresponding passages in these dictionaries, the authors assess the extent of borrowing, abridgment, and textual dependence (Anjū Shīrāzī, 1351/1972; Tatavī, 1340/1961; Nā’eṭi, 1245 AH: 10). Furthermore, the study investigates the position of Farrokhi Dictionary within the broader tradition of Persian lexicography by examining its relationship with later works, especially Āṣaf al-Lughat (Nā’eṭi, 1325 AH, pp. 1/3–13, 1/10). Through this approach, the study evaluates the originality, sources, and scholarly significance of Farrokhi Dictionary.4. ConclusionA careful examination of Farrokhi Dictionary and a comparison of its contents with authoritative Persian lexicons lead to the conclusion that its compiler drew the vast majority of its material from earlier dictionaries, particularly Farhang-e Jahāngīrī and Montakhab al-Lughat-e Shāhjahānī. Not only did he add little or nothing to the information provided in those sources, but he also omitted their textual citations and illustrative examples, which constitute one of the most valuable components of any lexicographical work. It appears that Moḥyī al-Dīn Nā’eṭi did not intend to undertake original research or extensive philological investigation; rather, he sought to compile a concise digest of several well-known dictionaries and produce a practical handbook capable of meeting the basic needs of readers seeking the meanings of commonly used Persian words and expressions.The resulting work is essentially an abridgment and compilation of earlier lexicographical materials and lacks independent scholarly value. Consequently, Farrokhi Dictionary cannot be regarded as a significant contribution to the history of Persian lexicography, nor does it occupy an important position within the development of Persian dictionary-making. From this perspective, the dictionary does not appear to warrant critical editing and publication as an independent scholarly text.Nevertheless, the present study demonstrates that Farrokhi Dictionary remains of some interest for comparative research on Persian lexicons produced in the Indian subcontinent and for investigations into the historical evolution of Persian lexicography in South Asia. Although the dictionary itself contributes little original linguistic or lexicographical material, its examination helps clarify patterns of textual borrowing, compilation practices, and the transmission of lexicographical knowledge among later Persian dictionaries of the subcontinent. As such, the work retains a limited but meaningful value within the broader context of lexicographical history and manuscript studies.BibliographyAnjū Shīrāzī, Jamāl al-Dīn Ḥusayn. (1351 [1972–73]). Farhang-e Jahāngīrī (The Jahangiri Dictionary). 3 vols. Edited by Raḥīm ʿAfīfī. Mashhad: Ferdowsi University Press [In Persian].Derāyatī, Moṣṭafā. (1390 [2011–12]). Fehrestgān-e Noskheh-hā-ye Khaṭṭī-ye Īrān (Fankhā) (Union Catalogue of Iranian Manuscripts). 45 vols. Tehran: National Library and Archives of Iran [In Persian].Hāshempour Sobḥānī, Towfīq, and Moḥammad-Reżā Naṣīrī. (1379 [2000–01]). Catalogue of the Fort William College Collection (Calcutta) in the Library of the National Archives of India, New Delhi. Supplement No. 8 of Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān (Academy Letter).Nā’eṭī, Aḥmad ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz. (1325 AH). Āṣaf al-Lughat (Asaf al-Lughat). Vol. 1. Hyderabad: ʿAzīz al-Maṭābiʿ [In Persian].Nā’eṭī, Moḥammad Moḥyī al-Dīn. (1245 AH). Farhang-e Farrokhī (Farrokhi Dictionary). Manuscript no. 502. National Archives of India [In Persian].Naqavī, Shahryār. (1341 [1962–63]). Farhang-nevīsī-ye Fārsī dar Hend va Pākestān (Persian Lexicography in India and Pakistan). Tehran: Bureau of Writing, Ministry of Culture [In Persian].Perti, R. K. (1989), Catalogue of Manuscripts of The Fort William College Collection In The National Archives of India Library, New Delhi: National Archives of India.Rādfar, Abolqāsem. (1392 [2013–14]). “Persian lexicography in South India (Deccan).” Kohan-Nāmeh-ye Adab-e Pārsī (Journal of Classical Persian Literature), 4, 57–70.Ṣādeqī, ʿAlī-Ashraf. (1393 [2014–15]). “Persian Lexicography in the Subcontinent from Its Beginnings to the Tenth Century AH (A History of Lexicography).” Shibh-e Qāreh (The Subcontinent), special issue of Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān, no. 2, pp. 381–392.Tatavī, ʿAbd al-Rashīd. (1340 [1961–62]). Montakhab al-Lughat-e Shāhjahānī (The Shahjahani Selected Lexicon). Tehran: Eslāmīyeh Bookstore [In Persian].فرهنگ فرخی ازجمله فرهنگهای فارسی ناشناختهای است که در سال 1245ق در شبهقارۀ هند نوشته شده است. مؤلف این فرهنگ محیالدین نایطی مشهور به پتّور است که از جزئیات زندگی او بیخبریم. خود فرهنگ هم چنانکه باید شناسایی نشده و اطلاعات بسیار اندکی که از آن به دست دادهاند تقریباً نادرست است. فرهنگ فرخی تاکنون چاپ نشده و تنها نسخۀ شناختهشدۀ آن پیشتر در مجموعۀ کالج فورت ویلیام نگهداری میشده و اکنون به آرشیو ملی هند منتقل شده است. این نسخه را محمد عباس متخلص به مخمور در سال 1249ق کتابت کرده است. مقدمۀ مختصر فرهنگ فرخی شامل پنج «روش» است: حروف الفبا؛ معانی حروف الفبا و چگونگی تبدیل آنها به یکدیگر؛ ضمایر؛ معانی حروف اضافه و پسوندها و پیشوندها؛ شیوۀ گردآوری، تدوین و تنظیم مطالب فرهنگ. محیالدین با انتقاد از شیوههای معمول فرهنگنویسان پیشین در تقسیمبندی فرهنگها و تنظیم مدخلها، مدخلهای اثر خود را به ترتیبِ حروف الفبا تنظیم کرده است. این مدخلها به اختصار تمام تعریف شدهاند و معانی نیز بدون هیچ شاهد و مستندی از متون در پی یکدیگر آمدهاند. مهمترین منابع فرهنگ فرخی به ترتیب استفاده از آنها فرهنگ جهانگیری، منتخباللغات شاهجهانی و کشفاللغات والاصطلاحات است. خودِ فرهنگ فرخی نیز از منابع آصفاللغات بوده است. موضوع این مقاله بررسی فرهنگ فرخی از جنبههای مختلف و عرضۀ اطلاعاتی تازه دربارۀ آن است.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14064_ae852ba7ae75fa4c5c7d186a61fcce92.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Analysis of Semantic and Syntactic Features of Cyberbullying on Instagram and X: Iranian Usersعنوان بررسی ویژگیهای معنایی و نحوی زورگویی سایبری در اینستاگرام و ایکس: کاربران ایرانی2032321404710.30465/lsi.2026.51844.1804FAالههکمریاستادیار، گروه آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه فرهنگیان، تهران، ایران0000-0001-5508-3251Journal Article20250503Abstract This study investigates the semantic and syntactic patterns of Persian-language cyberbullying among Iranian users on Instagram and X (formerly Twitter). Employing a mixed-methods approach combining qualitative thematic analysis and corpus linguistics, a dataset of n=500 cyberbullying incidents (August–December 2024) was analyzed. The findings reveal that Persian cyberbullying heavily relies on specific semantic targets, with 45% constituting gendered or sexualized slurs, alongside metaphorical dehumanization. Syntactically, perpetrators frequently employ agent-obscuring structures (70%), such as pro-drop and passive constructions, to evade accountability. Furthermore, emphatic punctuation is highly prevalent, with 65% of messages utilizing multiple exclamation marks. The study concludes that cyberbullying in Persian utilizes culturally specific linguistic mechanisms not fully captured by Western-centric algorithms. Developing localized, context-aware artificial intelligence tools is essential for the effective automated detection and mitigation of cyber-aggression in Persian-speaking digital environments.1. IntroductionThe rapid expansion of social media has fundamentally transformed interpersonal communication, simultaneously facilitating a rise in digital hostility. Cyberbullying, generally defined as intentional and repeated harm inflicted through electronic mediums, has emerged as a critical global issue (Smith et al., 2008; Vandebosch & Van Cleemput, 2008). The psychological ramifications of such online aggression are severe, often correlating with elevated anxiety, depression, and even suicidal ideation among victims (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010).While significant research has been conducted on English-language cyberbullying, non-Western linguistic contexts remain underexplored. In Iran, the widespread adoption of platforms like Instagram and X has generated unique environments for digital interaction. Persian-language cyberbullying exhibits specific cultural and linguistic markers that differentiate it from patterns observed in English contexts. Addressing this gap is vital for understanding the socio-linguistic dimensions of online aggression. Therefore, this study aims to answer the following research questions:1. What are the dominant semantic targets and thematic categories utilized by Iranian users in cyberbullying incidents?2. Which specific syntactic and orthographic structures are predominantly employed to convey hostility and minimize perpetrator accountability?3. How do the distinct architectural features of Instagram and X influence the linguistic manifestation of cyberbullying?2. Literature ReviewResearch on cyberbullying has evolved to recognize the complexity of online harassment. Early studies focused on defining the phenomenon and its prevalence (Smith et al., 2008). Subsequent comprehensive meta-analyses, such as that by Kowalski et al. (2014), highlighted the multifaceted nature of cyberbullying, emphasizing the roles of anonymity and platform architecture in facilitating aggressive behavior.Moving beyond general psychological impacts, researchers have increasingly utilized linguistic and computational approaches to detect online abuse. Dadvar et al. (2013) demonstrated that incorporating user context and specific linguistic features significantly improves the accuracy of machine learning models in identifying cyberbullying. In the Iranian context, Badri et al. (2021) adopted a multidimensional approach, showing that socio-cultural factors deeply influence the nature of cyber-aggression among Iranian youth. However, detailed syntactic and semantic analyses of Persian cyberbullying texts remain scarce, necessitating targeted corpus-based investigations to decode the specific linguistic strategies employed by Iranian users.3. METHODOLOGYThis study utilized a descriptive-analytical design, integrating qualitative thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006) and corpus linguistics (O’Keeffe & McCarthy, 2010). A purposive sample of n=500 text units containing aggressive content was collected (n=250 from public Instagram comments, n=250 from X posts) between August and December 2024. Data collection focused on trending hashtags and controversial public figures. The dataset was annotated and analyzed using MAXQDA 2022 for thematic coding and AntConc for corpus linguistics queries. Reliability was established through dual-coding of a 20% subsample, yielding a high inter-rater agreement (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89).4. Results4.1 Semantic PatternsThe most prevalent pattern was identity-based insult targeting personal characteristics. As shown in Table 1, 45% of offensive vocabulary was gender-based or body-referential, disproportionately targeting women through sexualized slurs. Appearance insults constituted 30%, with higher prevalence on Instagram consistent with its visual orientation. The remaining 25% comprised insults referencing ethnicity (8%), family (7%), and intelligence or mental health (10%).Table 1 Distribution of Offensive Vocabulary CategoriesCategoryFrequency (%)Gender-based / body-referential45%Physical appearance30%Ethnicity / nationality8%Family7%Intelligence / mental health / morality10%Beyond insult, three further semantic patterns were identified: threats (both disclosure of private information and physical harm); defamation through false declarative statements presented as objective facts; and dehumanizing metaphor, including animal comparisons (gāv (cow), khuk (pig), meymun (monkey)) and cutting irony deploying honorific titles sarcastically (Profesor! Fylsuf!).4.2 Syntactic and Stylistic PatternsThematic analysis revealed five primary semantic targets. The most dominant category was gendered and body-referential insults (45%), followed by attacks on physical appearance (30%). Attacks on intelligence, mental health, or morality constituted 10%, while ethnicity/nationality (8%) and family references (7%) comprised the remainder. Metaphorical dehumanization was a key strategy, frequently utilizing animal comparisons (e.g., “gāv” [cow], “khuk” [pig]). Sarcasm was also prevalent, often employing honorifics pejoratively (e.g., “Profesor!” [Professor!]).5. DiscussionThe findings reveal that cyberbullying among Iranian users on Instagram and X is shaped by both universal patterns of online aggression and features highly specific to the Persian language and cultural context.The significant prevalence of gender-based and body-referential insults (45\%) aligns with the multidimensional nature of cyberbullying globally, where attackers exploit societal vulnerabilities (Kowalski et al., 2014). However, as Badri et al. (2021) observed, the manifestation of these attacks is deeply embedded in the socio-cultural fabric of Iran, where honor, gender roles, and moral reputation carry substantial weight. Metaphorical dehumanization (using animal terms) and sarcastic honorifics serve as calculated strategies to strip targets of their social standing, validating the assertion by Vandebosch and Van Cleemput (2008) that cyberbullying involves complex, intentional power imbalances rather than mere impulsive anger.Furthermore, the syntactic analysis reveals a strategic linguistic evasion of accountability. By employing agent-obscuring constructions in 70\% of the aggressive utterances, perpetrators minimize their visible role in the harassment. The morphological flexibility of the Persian language, particularly its pro-drop nature, facilitates this obfuscation far more readily than grammatically rigid languages. This linguistic complexity supports the findings of Dadvar et al. (2013), who argued that relying solely on profanity lexicons is inadequate; detecting cyberbullying requires a deep understanding of structural and context-specific linguistic features.Platform differences also played a crucial role, corroborating the findings of Smith et al. (2008) and Kowalski et al. (2014) regarding the impact of digital mediums. Instagram’s visually driven architecture fostered sustained appearance-based insults in localized comment threads, whereas X’s text-centric, fast-paced environment encouraged rapid, irony-heavy attacks and collective dogpiling.6. CONCLUSIONThis study demonstrates that Persian cyberbullying is not merely direct verbal abuse, but a linguistically calculated behavior characterized by specific semantic targets and syntactic obfuscation. Given the severe psychological distress associated with such victimization (Hinduja & Patchin, 2010), proactive mitigation strategies are essential. The findings emphasize that current, predominantly English-centric detection algorithms are insufficient for identifying Persian cyber-aggression due to their inability to parse nuanced syntactic omissions, sarcastic honorifics, and cultural metaphors. Consequently, integrating Persian corpus linguistics (O’Keeffe & McCarthy, 2010) into the development of localized, context-aware AI tools is imperative for fostering safer digital environments for Iranian users.Bibliography:Badri, R., Kariman, N., Ozgoli, G., & Farsimadan, M. (2021). Sociocultural aspects of cyberbullying among Iranian youth: A qualitative study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 36(11-12), NP6007-NP6031.Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.Dadvar, M., Trieschnigg, D., Ordelman, R., & de Jong, F. (2013). Improving cyberbullying detection with user context. In Advances in Information Retrieval: 35th European Conference on IR Research (pp. 693–696). Springer.Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Bullying, cyberbullying, and suicide. Archives of Suicide Research, 14(3), 206–221.Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073–1137.O’Keeffe, A., & McCarthy, M. (Eds.). (2010). The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics. Routledge.Smith, P. K., Mahdavi, J., Carvalho, M., Fisher, S., Russell, S., & Tippett, N. (2008). Cyberbullying: Its nature and impact in secondary school pupils. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 49(4), 376–385.Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2008). Defining cyberbullying: A Qualitative research into the perceptions of youngsters. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11(4), 499–503زورگویی سایبری به عنوان یکی از چالشهای آسیبزای فضای مجازی، با گسترش روزافزون استفاده از شبکههای اجتماعی در سطح جهانی و به ویژه در ایران، اهمیت مضاعفی یافته است. این پدیده میتواند آثار مخربی بر قربانیان داشته باشد. پژوهش حاضر با هدف تحلیل ویژگیهای زبانی، معنایی (مانند واژگان توهینآمیز، استعارههای تحقیرآمیز، مضامین غالب) و نحوی (مانند ساختار جملات، کاربرد علائم نگارشی، حذف یا ابهام عامل) در محتوای زورگیرانۀ تولید شده توسط کاربران ایرانی در دو پلتفرم محبوب اینستاگرام و ایکس (توییتر سابق) انجام پذیرفت. دادههای پژوهش شامل مجموعهای از ۵۰۰ پست و نظرات مرتبط با آنها (۲۵۰ نمونه از هر پلتفرم) بود که با استفاده از روش نمونهگیری هدفمند و بر اساس معیارهای مشخصِ نشاندهندۀ پتانسیل زورگویی سایبری، طی بازه زمانی مشخصی گردآوری شدند. تحلیل دادهها با بهرهگیری از روش تحلیل محتوای کیفی با رویکرد رمزگذاری مضمون و با پشتیبانی نرمافزار تحلیل دادههای کیفی MAXQDA صورت گرفت. همچنین، از ابزارها و مفاهیم زبانشناسی پیکرهای برای شناسایی الگوهای تکرارشونده استفاده شد. یافتههای کلیدی نشان داد که واژگان با بار معنایی جنسیتمحور (حدود ۴۵ درصد از کل واژگان توهینآمیز شناساییشده) و همچنین استفادۀ مکرر و تأکیدی از علائم نگارشی خاص (بهویژه علامت تعجب چندگانه !!! در ۶۵ درصد موارد) نقش برجستهای در ساخت و تشدید فضای پرخاشگرانه دارند. علاوه بر این، مشاهده شد که در بخش قابل توجهی از محتوا (حدود ۷۰ درصد)، ساختارهای نحویِ فاقد فعلِ معلوم یا با فاعل مبهم (مانند جملات مجهول یا حذف فاعل) بهمنظور پنهانسازی هویت فرد زورگو یا کاهش مسئولیت مستقیم به کار گرفته میشود. این نتایج بر ضرورت حیاتیِ توسعه و بومیسازی الگوریتمها و ابزارهای تشخیص خودکار زورگویی سایبری تأکید دارد؛ ابزارهایی که قادر باشند نشانگرهای زبانیِ خاصِ فرهنگ و زبان فارسی در جامعۀ ایرانی را به دقت شناسایی و تحلیل کنند.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14047_0c14d9e1250da76981b5fac734227f0a.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823criticism and studying lexicon of persian slangنقد و بررسی فرهنگ فارسی عامیانه2332561406510.30465/lsi.2026.51907.1811FAمائدهسهلالدینفرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی، گروه فرهنگنویسی0009-0009-6328-4809Journal Article20250511Abstract The slang language and literature of any society encompass many of its cultural components and, consequently, serve as the most appropriate tool for understanding the cultural identity of its people. In this context, the lexicography of vernacular language, which has flourished in the contemporary era, plays an effective role in recognizing this identity. One of the prominent works in the field of vernacular lexicography is the Dictionary of Colloquial Persian (Farhang-e Fārsi-ye Āmiyāneh) by Abolhassan Najafi, which examines colloquial Tehrani lexical units from the beginning of the fourteenth solar century. This study aimed to evaluate the extent of this book’s success in adhering to the principles of lexicography, based on a library research methodology. The findings, following an examination of these principles and the elements of lexicography, indicate that this work is the best dictionary in the field of vernacular language; this is because, unlike similar previous works, it possesses a comprehensive, systematic, and up-to-date lexicographical structure, and it has avoided relying on oral sources in favor of a coherent written corpus—though it does contain some minor deficiencies in terms of formal lexicographical aspects.”1. IntroductionFrom the perspective of speaker social class, language is categorized into three tiers: super-standard, standard, and sub-standard. The super-standard variety is specific to classical literary texts, characterized by the use of literary devices and historical grammar. The standard variety refers to the formal, common written language prevalent among the educated class residing in the capital. The sub-standard (spoken) variety is further divided into two categories: ‘everyday/conversational/colloquial’ and ‘slang/vernacular.’ The everyday variety represents the spoken language of the educated stratum of society, whereas the slang variety belongs to semi-educated classes and includes two sub-categories: ‘slang in its conventional sense’ and ‘jargon/street slang’ (jahili). Conventional slang often features metaphorical and idiomatic expressions infused with humor, while the jahili variety is specific to the less-educated, illiterate, or anti-social classes, often manifesting phonological processes such as metathesis (e.g., chisep instead of chips), which the educated or semi-educated classes avoid using (Najafi, 2008).In the contemporary era, numerous dictionaries have been compiled to define and explain the words and expressions of the slang variety, including: Farhang-e Avam by Mirqoli Amini, Farhang-e Loghat-e Amiyaneh by Mohammad Ali Jamalzadeh, Farhang-e Loghat-e Amiyaneh va Moaser by Reza Anzabi-Nejad and Mansour Servat, Farhang-e Farsi-ye Amiyaneh by Abolhassan Najafi, and Ketab-e Koucheh by Ahmad Shamlu."Research Questions1) What are the distinguishing features persian slang lexicon from other similar lexicon? 2) To what extent does persian slang lexicon conform to the fundamental criterias of modern lexicography? 3) Can persian slang lexicon be considered the best work in the field of Persian slang lexicography?2. Literature ReviewFour detailed articles have been written so far on the criticism of Persian slang lexicon: Baha' al-Din Khorramshahi, in his article "The Turning Point and Deep Transformation in Persian Lexicography," makes several criticisms of some elements of lexicon. Then, by comparing the frequency of slang entries in Najafi's work with Jamalzadeh's lexicon of slang Words and Today's Persian lexicon by Sadri Afshar and the Hekmi Sisters, he concludes that Persian slang lexicon is unique in terms of form, content, and methodology.In his article, "Slang or Spoken Persian Dictionary, Which?", Ali Mohammad Haqhshenas considers this dictionary, like many similar works, to be data-based, compiled based on a specific linguistic corpus, and this characteristic, in addition to the comprehensiveness and coherence it gives to the work, also deprives it of many important sources. For example, the combinations "water to gather in one's mouth" in the meaning of "someone's appetite to be stimulated" and "water to flow over one's head" in the meaning of "overwhelmed by problems" are not included. Another is that some entries are recorded without mentioning their slang meaning or even their evidence. For example, the entry "Ay bi-kolah" is included with its dictionary meaning and, consequently, without mentioning the evidence of irony, and the entry "Ay bakolah/ay maddi" is also recorded with its literal and dictionary meaning; while the appropriate ironic meaning can be extracted from that evidence. Haqhshenas also mentions the special advantages of this work as follows: The author's linguistic corpus is quite specific and structured. Some words that appear to belong to the formal language class, but are used in common usage with a figurative meaning, have been recorded for the first time in this work; such as: book (in the sense of thinness), rubbing (in the sense of being eliminated), and string (in the sense of information and awareness). Also, the colloquial meaning of grammatical words has been described for the first time in this dictionary. For example, the suffix "به" has been recorded with ten meanings, of which we will mention three below: 1) Before: I woke up at two o'clock in the afternoon. 2) Dependent on, subject to: If a man has a beard..., he also has a goat. 3) I swear to, I swear to: By five people if I were a person of these words. Or some of the meanings of the conjunction "ta" are recorded as follows: 1) As far as: Ta works. 2) As soon as: Ta ignored it, he picked up the rug... 3) (before the verb in the imperative mood) to express a transaction, for example: You wanted me to do it, so I didn't do it.In his article “Bazham” on Persian slang lexicon, Houshang A’lam considers many of the lexicon entries to be old and abandoned due to the type of sources used and the author’s non-Tehranian origin. He also considers many vernacular entries such as: “Ouf shodan” (in childish language), “Baybay” (to say goodbye)”, “Khuda bebakhshad” (in response to “Bebakhshid!”), “Shoke kerden/sheden”, “Tayyeb va Tahir”, “Langderaz” and “Nokar Babaye Kasi” to be worthy of being recorded in the lexicon, but he believes that the reason for their absence is that the author did not refer to publications such as “Towfiq”, “Baba Shamal” or the works of Sadegh Chubak, Mohammad Masoud and “Ketabe Kocheh”. He considers some of the pronunciations to be due to the use of written, official and non-vernacular sources (Nakas, “Neshastan”). A'lam considers another flaw in the work to be the failure to determine the linguistic levels (formal, abandoned, ignorant, and vulgar) of the entries, and believes that knowledge of these levels is essential for authors of bilingual dictionaries (in order to find stylistic equivalents) and speakers of the language (in order to know the type of social status of the use of words or proverbs). He considers the old-fashioned language of some of the definitions, inconsistency in the way pronunciations are recorded, and the failure to mention the antonyms of the entries to be other flaws in this work.In his valuable article, History of Persian slang lexicography, Mehrdad Naghzgooi Kohan, after mentioning the history of slang lexicography, introduces Persian slang lexicon. After mentioning Najafi's view on the classification of type slang, he describes the general characteristics of the work. Then, in a six-line paragraph, he only criticizes part of its phonetic transcription method and then states the advantages of the work over other dictionaries.3. MethodologyThis research examines the extent of its success in adhering to the principles of contemporary lexicography through a detailed study and examination of Persian slang lexicon. 4. ResultsCompared to similar works, Abolhasan Najafi's Persian slang lexicon is the most consistent with the standards of contemporary lexicography. So far, Persian slang lexicon is the best work in the field of Persian slang lexicography due to its structural methodology.5. Discussion Previous works in the field of criticism of Persian slang lexicon had only dealt with a limited and brief examination of this work, and none had criticized all elements of the culture, such as: entry, evidence, phonetics, and etymology, in accordance with scientific and modern standards of lexicography. However, the present study has examined and criticized it in detail with the aim of proving the superiority of this lexicon over similar works.6. ConclusionDespite all its structural shortcomings, the Persian slang lexicon remains the best—and perhaps the only—lexicon in the field of slang language. This is because it has examined slang Tehrani lexical units from the beginning of the 14th [solar] century using an extensive written corpus, to the extent that half of its entries have not been found in any previous general or even slang Persian lexicons. Furthermore, Persian slang lexicon has examined the entries in accordance with standard, up-to-date lexicographical practices; upon recording an entry, the dictionary—wherever possible—provides phonetic transcription, etymology, grammatical identification, and occasionally usage labels, followed by a definition, illustrative examples, and the sources for those examples. In addition to these features, it is the first slang lexicon to have recorded even negative verb forms with their specific slang meanings.Bibliography:A’lam, Houshang. (2001). Again about Persian slang lexicon. Nameh Farhangestan, 1(17), 96-125.Haqhshenas, Ali Mohammad. (1990). Which is slang or colloquial Persian language?. Danesh Publication, 96, 59-65. Khorramshahi, Baha'uddin. (1990). A turning point and profound change in Persian lexicography. Bukhara, 12, 352-387.Khorramshahi, Baha'uddin. (2008). From Word to lexicon. Nahid.Naghzgooye kohan, Mehrdad. (2007). History of Persian slang lexicography. Lexicography (Special Issue of the Academy Journal), 1, 167-183.Najafi, Abolhasan. (2008). Persian slang lexicon. Niloufar.زبان و ادبیات عامیانۀ هر جامعه دربرگیرندۀ بسیاری از مؤلفههای فرهنگی آن و درنتیجه، مناسبترین ابزار برای شناخت هویت فرهنگی مردمان آن جامعه است. در این میان، فرهنگنویسی زبان عامیانه که در دورۀ معاصر رونق بسیاری گرفتهاست، نقش مؤثری در شناختن این هویت دارد. یکی از آثار مطرح در زمینۀ فرهنگنگاری این گونۀ زبانی، فرهنگ فارسی عامیانه، اثر ابوالحسن نجفی است که واحدهای واژگانی محاورهای تهرانی را از آغاز قرن چهاردهم بررسی کردهاست. این پژوهش قصد داشت که بر پایۀ روش کتابخانهای، میزان موفقیت این کتاب را در رعایت اصول فرهنگنویسی ارزیابی کند. یافتۀ آن پس از مطالعۀ این اصول و بررسی عناصر فرهنگنویسی این بود که اثر یادشده بهترین فرهنگ در حوزۀ زبان عامیانه است؛ چراکه برخلاف آثار مشابه پیشین، دارای ساختار جامع، نظاممند و بهروز فرهنگنویسی است و نیز از منابع شفاهی دوری جُسته و بهرهمند از پیکرۀ مکتوب منسجمی است؛ گرچه اشکالاتی نیز در حوزههای صوری فرهنگنویسی دارد.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14065_7dc648573025e45ad653e535fabfd1ae.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Parthian Hymns Dedicated to the Narisah Yazad in Western Middle Iranian Manuscripts in Sogdian Script from the Turfan Collectionسرودهای پارتی برای ایزد نریسه در میان دستنویسهای ایرانی میانۀ غربی به خط سغدی از مجموعۀ تورفان2572861406210.30465/lsi.2026.53496.1830FAسپیدهطاهریپژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی0009-0007-4023-6316زهرهزرشناساستاد، گروه زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایرانسیروسنصرالهزادهاستاد، گروه زبانشناسی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایرانJournal Article20251118Abstract This study examines four fragmentary Parthian manuscripts from the Turfan Collection, which are dedicated to the worship of the deity Narisaf Yazad. These manuscripts belong to the Manichaean textual corpus discovered in the Turfan oasis in present-day Xinjiang, China, and represent an important part of the multilingual religious literature ofCentral Asia. Written in Western Middle Iranian languages and preserved primarily in Sogdian script, these fragments provide valuable evidence for the study of Manichaean hymnology, Iranian religious vocabulary, and the transmission of theological concepts across linguistic boundaries.The main objective of this research is to provide a philological, codicological, linguistic, and textual analysis of these hymnic fragments and to clarify the religious and cosmological role of Narisaf Yazad within Manichaean tradition. The study examines the physical characteristics of the manuscripts, including their material condition, script, layout, lineation, and state of preservation, while also analyzing their linguistic features through transcription, transliteration, and translation of the readable sections.The results demonstrate that these fragments represent liturgical hymns characterized by communal invocations, ritual formulas, and extensive praise of Narisaf Yazad. In these texts, Narisaf is portrayed as the Third Messenger, a divine judge, and a mediator responsible for maintaining cosmic order and evaluating human actions. The study also highlights the importance of formulaic expressions, including the repeated invocation “Ēl Ēl Ēl,” as a significant ritual and stylistic element within Manichaean religious texts.Furthermore, comparative analysis with Manichaean Chinese materials reveals textual and thematic parallels that reflect the multilingual and transregional character of Manichaean literary culture in Turfan. The findings contribute to a deeper understanding of Middle Iranian religious literature and demonstrate the role of Parthian and Middle Persian as sacred languages within Manichaean communities.1. IntroductionThe Manichaean manuscripts discovered in the Turfan oasis represent one of the most significant sources for understanding the religious, linguistic, and cultural interactions of Central Asia. Among these materials, theWestern Middle Iranian manuscripts written in Sogdian script occupy a particular position due to their importance for the study of Iranian languages, Manichaean theology, and the transmission of religious traditions across different cultural environments.The present study focuses on four fragmentary Parthian manuscripts dedicated to Narisaf Yazad, a prominent divine figure within Manichaean cosmology. Although these fragments are damaged and incomplete, they preserve valuable information regarding Manichaean liturgical practices, religious terminology, and theological concepts. Through a detailed examination of these manuscripts, this research aims to reconstruct aspects of their textual structure and clarify the position of Narisaf within the Manichaean religious system.The significance of these fragments lies not only in their linguistic features but also in their reflection of the multilingual environment of the Turfan Manichaean communities. The coexistence of Iranian and Chinese textual traditions demonstrates the complex processes of translation, adaptation, and transmission through which Manichaean religious ideas circulated in Central Asia. 2. Research QuestionsThis study addresses the following questions:1. What are the codicological and textual characteristics of the four Parthian manuscript fragments dedicated to Narisaf Yazad?2. What linguistic features can be identified in these hymnic texts, and how do they reflect the multilingual environment of Manichaean communities?3. What theological and cosmological functions are attributed to Narisaf Yazad in these hymns?4. How do these Parthian fragments relate to other Manichaean textual traditions, particularly Chinese Manichaean manuscripts from Turfan?5. What role did Western Middle Iranian languages play in the religious and liturgical context of Manichaean communities?3. Literature ReviewResearch on Manichaean manuscripts from Turfan has significantly contributed to the understanding of Central Asian religious history, Iranianlanguages, and the development of Manichaean textual traditions. Previous studies have examined various aspects of these manuscripts, including their linguistic characteristics, manuscript culture, theological concepts, and relationship with other Manichaean sources.Studies of Western Middle Iranian languages, particularly Parthian and Middle Persian, have demonstrated their importance as literary and religious languages within Manichaean communities. The preservation of these languages in religious manuscripts from Turfan provides evidence of their continued significance beyond their original geographical contexts.Previous research has also emphasized the multilingual nature of the Turfan corpus, where Iranian, Sogdian, and Chinese traditions interacted. This multilingual environment resulted in processes of translation, adaptation, and reinterpretation of religious texts. However, fragmentary Parthian hymns dedicated specifically to Narisaf Yazad require further examination regarding their textual structure, theological significance, and relationship with broader Manichaean traditions.The present study contributes to this field by combining codicological, philological, and comparative approaches to analyze these previously fragmented materials and to clarify the role of Narisaf Yazad within Manichaean religious literature.Bibliography Durkin-Meisterernst, D. )2004.( Dictionary of Manichean Middle Persian and Parthian (Corpus Fontium Manichaeorum, Dictionary of Manichaean Texts. Vol. III, 1), Turnhout: Brepols.Durkin-Meisterernst, D. )2014(. Miscellaneous Hymns. Middle Persian and Parthian Hymns in the Turfan Collection. Turnhout: Brepols (BTT 31).Monchi-Zadeh, D. )1981(. Die Geschichte Zarêr's, Uppsala.30& 60.Morano, E. )2000(. “A Survey of the Extant Parthian Crucifixion Hymns”, in: R. E. Emmerick, W. Sundermann and P. Zieme (eds.), Studia Manichaica. IV. Internationaler Kongress zum Manichäismus, Berlin, 14.-18. Juli 1997, Berlin, pp. 398-429.Morano, E. )2004(. “Manichaean Middle Iranian Incantation Texts from Turfan”, in: D. Durkin-Meisterernst et al. (eds.), Turfan Revisited: The First Century of Research into the Arts and Cultures of the Silk Road, Berlin, pp. 221-227.Morano, E. )2018(. “Religion in hymns: a Parthian bifolio in Manichaean script from Turfan with hymns to the Father of Greatness”, in: Z. Özertural and G. Şilfeler (eds.), Der östliche Manichäismus im Spiegel seiner Buchund Schriftkultur. Vorträge des Göttinger Symposiums vom 11./12. März 2015, Berlin-Boston, pp. 35-55.Morano, E. )2019(. “Manichaean Sogdian Cosmogonical Texts in Manichaean Script”, in: Chen Hao (ed.), Competing Narratives between Nomadic People and their Sedentary Neighbours: Papers of the 7th International Conference on the Medieval History of the Eurasian Steppe, Nov. 9–12, 2018, Shanghai University, China, Szeged, pp. 195-215.Naveh, J.& Sh. Shaked. )1985. (Amulets and Magic Bowles. Aramaic Incantations of Late Antiquity, Leiden.Reck, Ch. )1998(. A catalogue of the Middle Iranian manuscripts in Sogdian script of the Berlin Turfan collection, in: Proceedings of the Third European Conference of Iranian Studies, held in Cambridge, 11th to 15th September 1995, Part1: Old and Middle Iranian Studies, hrsg. v. N. Sims-Williams, Wiesbaden, S. 147-152, Taf. 17a und b (Beitrӓge zur Iranistik 17).Reck, Ch. (2006). Mitteliranische Handschriften, Teil 1: Berliner Turfanfragmente manichäischen Inhalts in soghdischer Schrift, (Verzeichnis der Orientalischen Handschriften in Deutschland; Band XVIII,1), Stuttgart.Sundermann, W. )1979a(. “Die mittelpersischen und parthischen Turfantexte als Quellen zur Geschichte des vorislamischen Zentralasien”, in: J. Harmatta (ed.), Prolegomena to the Sources on the History of Pre-islamic Central Asia, Budapest, 143-151.Sundermann, W. )1979b(. "Namen von Göttern, Dämonen und Menschen in iranischen Versionen des manichäischen Mythos" Altorientalische Forschungen, vol. 6, no. JG, 1979, pp. 95-134. Sundermann, W. )1981(.Mitteliranische manichäische Texte kirchengeschichtlichen Inhalts.Mit einem Appendix von Nicholas Sims-Williams. Berlin: Berliner Turfantexte 11.Sundermann, W. )1985(. Āfurišn, in: En.Ir., Vol. I, London-Boston, pp. 593b–594b.Sundermann, W. )1991(.Anmerkungen zu: Th. Thilo, Einige Bemerkungen zu zweichinesisch-manichäischen Textfragmenten der Berliner Turfansammlung, in Ägypten - Vorderasien-Turfan.Probleme der Edition und Bearbeitung altorientalischer Handschriften, ed. H. Klengel & W. Sundermann (SGKAO 23), Berlin 1991, pp. 171–174.Sundermann, Werner & Yoshida Yutaka. )1992(. Bӓzӓklik, Berlin, and Kyoto, Manichaean Parthian Hymn Transcribed in Sogdian Script. Sundermann, W. (2002). “ĒL as an epithet of the Manichaean Third Messenger”, in: Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam 26. Studies in honour of Shaul Shaked, pp. 172–175.این مقاله به بررسی و تحلیل چهار قطعه (پارتی) پهلوی اشکانی از مجموعۀ تورفان میپردازد که به نیایش ایزد نریسف اختصاص دارند. پژوهش با شرح دقیق و جامع ویژگیهای نسخهشناختی اصلی دستنویسها، شامل ابعاد فیزیکی، ساختار برگها، وضعیت حفظ متن، جنس و کیفیت مواد نوشتاری، و ویژگیهای خطی آغاز میشود و سپس آوانویسی، حرفنویسی، قواعد دستوری و ترجمه متنها ارائه میگردد تا جنبههای زبانی، نگارشی و دستوری روشن شود. تحلیل محتوایی متون نیز جایگاه نریسه در نظام کیهانی و دینی مانوی، مفاهیم مرتبط با آئینها و نقش سرودهای کوتاه در سنت آیینی و اجرای مذهبی را نشان میدهد. نتایج پژوهش نشان میدهد این سرودها علاوه بر اهمیت مذهبی و تاریخی، بازتابدهندۀ ویژگیهای زبانی، نگارشی و نسخهشناختی دقیق متون پهلوی اشکانی مانوی هستند. با بازخوانی و ترجمه دقیق و تحلیل مستند، مقاله تصویری جامع، روشن و روزآمد از جنبههای زبانی، محتوایی، نگارشی و نسخهشناختی سرودهای پارتی مانوی در تورفان ارائه میدهد.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14062_e775a20f0553c08010a113c9c67de544.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Analysis of court conversations based on the pragmatic markers of politeness and impolitenessتحلیل مکالمات دادگاه بر مبنای نشانگرهای کاربردشناختی ادب و بیادبی2873221406610.30465/lsi.2026.50048.1781FAثریاسبهانیپژوهشکده تعلیم و تربیت، آموزش و پرورش، خوزستان، اهواز0009-0005-4612-1603Journal Article20240918Abstract Along with the progress of the judicial system, the language of the court and the way of speaking in legal contexts have also been accompanied by changes and developments. This new linguistic field provides a valuable platform for examining linguistic theories and their adaptability in the field of law. In this regard, this article aims to compare the politeness and impoliteness markers of Brown and Levinson (1987) and Culpepper (1996) theories in the conversations of judges and defendants and determines the appearance of these markers and degree of following and violating regarding these variables by these two judicial groups. For this purpose, 15 video files related to the public sessions of the Iranian criminal courts were taken from the Aparat website as a available sampling, and after transcription, they were subjected to quantitative and qualitative analysis. The results of descriptive and inferential statistics show that judges and defendants have the highest frequency in the "observing of social distance" marker in the formation of polite words. Also, regarding the violation of the principles of politeness, it was found that the marker of "non-observing of negative politeness" had the highest frequency in the conversations of the judges, and the marker of "non-observing of power relations" had the highest frequency in the words of the defendants. In addition, the results show that the judges have a significant difference with the defendants in respect of other markers, except for the "observing of positive politeness" marker. The defendants also have significant differences with the judges in violating all the markers. The reason why most judges adhere to the principle of politeness can be related to the issue of keeping face and power.1. Introduction "Conversation analysis", is an approach to discourse analysis which is used in the study of official and organizational conversations, including court conversations. The conversation analysis approach in the court context provides a significant contribution to the empirical analysis of pragmatic concepts in this type of interaction. One of the issues that always arises in the context of the court is the observance of politeness in the conversations of its participants. In recent years, the phenomenon of politeness has attracted the attention of theorists across a wide range of social sciences, and various opinions have been expressed about it. In order to create an appropriate analytical approach, this study attempts to formulate markers of compliance and violation of politeness principles in terms of social norms of court language based on the theories of Brown and Levinson (1987) and Culpepper (1996). Accordingly, the present study seeks to answer these two questions:1. How are the pragmatic categories of politeness and impoliteness represented in courtroom conversations?2. What is the difference between judges and defendants in terms of observing and not observing the principles of politeness?2. Literature ReviewRazavian and Jalili Doab (2017), Dowlatabadi, Mehri, and Tajabadi (2014), Baghbani and Karampour (2017), Liao (2019), Ardi, Mangsor, Mansoor, and Ahmad (2021) as well as Grainger (2018) have attempted to examine from a different angle, the concepts of politeness theory of Brown and Levinson (1987) and Culpepper (1996) in the context of the court and its participants, and have achieved some results. For instance, in their study, Razavian and Jalili Doab analyzed the linguistic characteristics of defendants in two fraud cases within the Semnan Province judicial system, covering stages ranging from initial interrogation to the preliminary investigation and the trial. One of the findings of their research indicates that adherence to the principle of politeness is a fundamental and constant element of the speech of this group of offenders. In fact, those accused of fraud cannot achieve their desired outcome—namely, deceiving people and exploiting their assets—without observing this principle. By adhering to the principle of politeness and offering hope to complainants, these offenders seek to deceive them while simultaneously persuading the interrogator and the judge; for a polite demeanor tends to shield an individual from suspicion. Consequently, observing this principle can positively influence the audience's perception of the speaker and, in turn, sway the outcome of verbal interactions—such as interrogations and court proceedings—in the defendant's favor. Moreover, possessing background knowledge of the power structure within judicial bodies, these individuals are well-versed in the proper conduct; consequently, they speak respectfully to judicial officials, exchange pleasantries with complainants, articulate their points firmly and confidently, and employ plural pronouns and verb forms in their speech.These two researchers believe that a fraudster employs language as a tool in the course of committing the crime; consequently, depending on the type of fraud, the individual must possess a command of certain linguistic and non-linguistic structures. Based on the physical and discursive context, the fraudster selects specific tools from a range of linguistic options and employs them to mount a favorable defense against judicial authorities and the victims of the fraud.As is evident from this study and its results, the previous researchers have not simultaneously examined markers of politeness and impoliteness in the conversations between judges and defendants. On the other hand, the clarification of conversations between high-ranking defendants and judges from the perspective of the theory of politeness and impoliteness in the broad context of the Iranian criminal courts, which is the focus of this research, has received less attention.3. MethodologyThe present study aims to explore the conversations between judges and defendants in Iranian trial courts from the perspective of language pragmatics in a descriptive (calculation of the frequency and percentage of markers stated by judges and defendants) and inferential (comparative calculation of conversations between judges and defendants using the Chi-square test) study, using a combined quantitative and qualitative method. The corpus of this research consists of fifteen video files related to Iranian criminal court sessions on various topics which were taken from the Aparat website using a convenience sampling method. After transcription of the conversations, 1820 sentences related to judges and 2050 sentences related to defendants were analyzed in terms of Brown and Levinson (1987) and Culpepper (1996) markers. This analysis was conducted based on the research method of Schutzler and Schlotter (2022) and according to the data obtained in legal linguistics between judge and defendant. In order to ensure the validity of the research, twenty percent of the data were reviewed by two researchers and through Pearson's correlation using SPSS software, version 24, a validity coefficient of (0.84) was obtained. In other words, agreement was reached in 84 percent of the analytical cases. In the descriptive statistics, a difference of at least twenty percent in the frequency of markers of the researched categories between the judge and the defendant was considered a “significant difference” (Scherer, 2013). In this regard, if the difference was between five and twenty percent, it was considered as a "moderate difference" and if this difference was less than five percent, it was considered as a "close difference." In calculating inferential statistics and the chi-square test, if the "P-value" was less than 0.05, it was considered as a significant difference in the use of the category in question between the two groups of judges and defendants.4. ResultsTable 4.1: Categories of Politeness and ImpolitenesspolitenessmarkerObserving social distanceObserving power relationsObserving positive politenessObserving negative politenesstotaljudge399375182371029percentage66.565.7827.2765.2864.35defendant20119548126570percentage33.534.2172.7234.7135.64impolitenessmarkerNon-observing social distanceNon-observing power relationsNon- observing positive politenessNon-observing negative politenesstotaljudge15428190228percentage5.2613.333632.620.70defendant270273144186873percentage94.7386.666467.3979.29 Figure 4.1: Comparison of the Percentage of Politeness Markers in Court Conversations Between the Judge and the Defendant Table 4.2: Hypothesis Test of Politeness Category in Conversationmarkerjudgedefendantchi-square (X2)degree of freedomP-valueObserving social distance39920141.4230.001Observing power relations375195Observing positive politeness1848Observing negative politeness237126total1029570Figure 4.2: The extent of politeness in conversations between judges and defendants Figure 4.3: Comparison of the percentage of impoliteness markers in court conversations between the judge and the defendant Table 4.3: Hypothesis test of impoliteness category in conversationmarkerjudgedefendantchi-square (X2)degree of freedomP-valueNon-observing social distance15270107.6930.001Non-observing power relations42273Non-observing positive politeness81144Non-observing negative politeness90186total228873Figure 4.4: The extent of impoliteness in conversations between judges and defendants5. DiscussionThe statistics obtained from the descriptive and inferential analysis of politeness markers (Brown & Levinson, 1987) in this study shows that judges prioritize the markers of "observing social distance," "observing power relations," "observing negative politeness," and "observing positive politeness," respectively, and except for the marker of "observing positive politeness," they have a significant difference with defendants in observing other markers. In this regard, defendants also make an effort to maintain the issue of politeness in the same order of components. Also, regarding the issue of impoliteness in court discourse from the perspective of Culpepper (1996), the statistics shows that defendants, in significant contrast to judges, engage in norm-breaking behaviors and speech by applying the markers of "non-observing power relations", "non-observing social distance", "non-observing negative politeness" and "non-observing positive politeness". In this regard, judges also, to a less extent, and by applying the markers of "non-observing negative politeness", "non-observing positive politeness", "non-observing power relations", and "non-observing social distance", cause the formation of unkind and unfamiliar behaviors. 6. ConclusionThe results show that both judges and defendants have the highest frequency in the following of "observing social distance" marker in the formation of polite words. Also, regarding the issue of impoliteness, it was found that the marker of "non-observing negative politeness" had the highest frequency in the conversations of the judges, and the marker of "non-observing power relations" had the highest frequency in the words of the defendants. Results reveal that judges pay more attention to observing the issue of politeness than defendants. Although the judges have also shown a small level of impoliteness, this inappropriate behavior has never been condemned. Therefore, it can be said that the criterion of whether or not words are polite is an issue that has been intertwined with the issue of power in legal discourse. The main reason for the results of this research may lie in the experience of judges, their knowledge of the court, and their awareness of procedural laws. The issue that arises in the end is the applicability of the theories under study in the court context.BibliographyArdi, N., Mangsor, M. M., Mansoor, M., & Ahmad, A. (2021). Politeness strategies in the criminal trial. International Journal of Academic Research in Business & Social Sciences, 11(6), 1239-1250.Baghbani, Gh., & Karampour, F. (2017). A linguistic investigation into the relationship between the power index and linguistic politeness during interrogation: A discourse-analytic and legal approach. Linguistic Researches, 8(2), 1–20.Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 349- 367.Dowlatabadi, H., Mehri, E., & Tajabadi, A. (2014). Politeness strategies in conversation exchange: The case of council for dispute settlement in Iran. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 411-419.Liao, M. (2019). Politeness in the courtroom discourse. Forensic Research and Criminology International Journal, 7(2), 45-61.Razavian, H., & Jalili Doab, M. (2017). Analysis of the linguistic characteristics of fraudsters: A case study of Semnan Province. Journal of Language and Linguistics, 13(26), 141–171.Schreier, M. (2013). Qualitative content analysis. Sage.Schutzler, O. & Schluter, J. (2022). Data and Methods in Corpus Linguistics: Comparative Approaches. Cambridge University Press.همگام با پیشرفتهای نظام قضایی، زبان دادگاه و شیوه سخن گفتن در بافت حقوقی نیز با تغییر و تحولاتی همراه شده است. این حوزه نوین زبانی، بستر ارزشمندی جهت بررسی نظریههای زبانشناسی و میزان تطبیقپذیری آنها را در عرصه حقوق فراهم میآورد. در همین راستا، این مقاله قصد دارد بصورت تطبیقی نشانگرهای ادب و بیادبی نظریه براون و لوینسون (1987) و کالپپر (1996) را در مکالمات قضات و متهمان بررسی نموده و چکونگی نمود این نشانگرها و میزان تقید و بیقیدی این دو گروه از دادرسی را نسبت به این مقولات مشخص نماید . به همین منظور، 15 فایل تصویری مربوط به جلسات علنی محاکم کیفری ایران بصورت نمونهگیری در دسترس از تارنمای آپارات برداشت شد و پس از پیادهسازی، مورد تحلیل کمّی و کیفی قرار گرفت. نتایج آمار توصیفی و استنباطی نشان میدهد که قضات و متهمان در شکلگیری کلام مؤدبانه، بیشترین بسامد را در نشانگر «رعایت فاصله اجتماعی» داشتهاند. همچنین در خصوص نقض اصول ادب مشخص شد که نشانگر «عدم رعایت ادب سلبی» بالاترین میزان تکرار را در مکالمات قضات و نشانگر «عدم رعایت روابط قدرت» بیشترین میزان بسامد را در کلام متهمان داشتهاند. بعلاوه نتایج نشان میدهد که قضات بجز در نشانگر «رعایت ادب ایجابی»، در مراعات سایر نشانگرها دارای اختلاف معنادار با متهمان هستند. متهمان نیز در نقض تمامی انشانگرها دارای اختلاف چشمگیر با قضات میباشند. دلیل پایبندی بیشتر قضات به اصل ادب را میتوان با مسئله حفظ وجهه و قدرت مرتبط دانست.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14066_972494a2e9aa540c53cdadab0caa401c.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823A Lexicographical Investigation of Al-sorâh men al-sehâhپژوهشی در الصّراح من الصّحاح3233561406310.30465/lsi.2026.51929.1810FAسیدمحمدصاحبیاستادیار، گروه فرهنگنویسی، فرهنگستان زبان و ادب فارسی، تهران، ایران0000-0003-4734-9448Journal Article20250511Abstract The Arabic–Persian dictionary Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, compiled by Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad Qarshi, is a concise Persian translation of Tāj al-loghat va Sehāh al-Arabiyyat by Abu Nasr Ismail ben Hammād Jowhari (d. 393 AH). Qarshi completed Al-sorāh men al-sehāh in Kāshghar in 700 AH. In 1397 SH/2018 CE, Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān produced a critical edition of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh; this edited text forms the basis of the present study. Focusing on the Persian equivalents, this article systematically catalogs the dictionary’s rare, prominent, and valuable lexical items. First, the Persian equivalent is recorded as the headword, followed by its Arabic original, or by the Arabic original together with a definition containing the equivalent. When the Arabic source is obscure or archaic, modern equivalents or succinct definitions, drawn from comparative consultation of classical lexica, are supplied. Numerous Persian renderings found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh also appear in earlier and later Arabic–Persian dictionaries, attesting to reciprocal intertextual influences between Qarshi’s work and its lexicographical predecessors and successors. To elucidate these diachronic and intertextual networks, each entry is cross-referenced with relevant early Arabic–Persian dictionaries. Finally, a quantitative analysis delineates the intertextual relationships between Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and other early Arabic–Persian dictionaries, shedding light on its place within the broader tradition of bilingual lexicography.1. IntroductionAl-sorāh men al-sehāh is an Arabic–Persian dictionary and one of the works of Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled, known as Jamāl Qarshi (see: Qarshi, 1397: 1/«ححح»; Zāker al-Hosayni, 1382: 12–13, 18). This book is essentially a concise translation of Tāj al-loghat va Sehāh al-Arabiyyat by Abu Nasr Ismail ben Hammād Jowhari (d. 393 AH). Qarshi spent a considerable period abridging Sehāh and translating its lexical items into Persian, and completed Al-sorāh men al-sehāh in 700 AH (see: Qarshi, 1397/2018, pp. 2/2170; Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 145, 147).2. Literature ReviewHeydariān (1397/2018) in his introduction to Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, mentions a number of the text’s Persian “unknown or low-frequency words” and “examples of simple and compound verbal nouns.” He does not, however, provide a comprehensive and rigorous definition of these lexical units, nor does he offer a comparative, intertextual, or statistical examination of them. Instead, he merely presents a brief alphabetical list of low-frequency equivalents together with their Arabic originals.Sāhebi (1402/2023), in an article, discusses the method of editing Al-sorāh men al-sehāh from a critical perspective. He examines Heydariān’s errors and misreading’s by consulting the manuscripts used by him and offers his own proposed correct readings. He notes discrepancies and inconsistencies between the readings of the printed text and those of the manuscripts, and points to some of the defects and shortcomings of the edited text in comparison with the manuscript witnesses. 3. MethodologyIn this study, the low-frequency words recorded in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh as equivalents of Arabic headwords are presented and examined in alphabetical order. In each case, the Persian equivalent is first given as the headword, followed by its Arabic original, or by the Arabic original together with a definition containing the equivalent. Unfamiliar Persian words have been vocalized on the basis of the printed text of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh, its manuscripts, and Persian dictionaries. Whenever the Arabic original is not sufficiently clear, explicit, or familiar, a modern definition or synonym has been provided for each lexical unit through consultation of other dictionaries and sources.Some of the low-frequency Persian equivalents found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh are also attested in Arabic–Persian dictionaries composed both before and after it. To demonstrate these intertextual relationships, references to other early Arabic–Persian dictionaries are cited in the documentation of each entry.4. ResultsTable 1 presents those Arabic–Persian dictionaries that predate Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and share with it at least three low-frequency equivalents in the sense intended by Qarshi. The table lists both the number of similar cases and the degree of overlap expressed as a percentage (for the dates of composition or transcription of these works, see: Karamaini, 1385/2006, front cover; Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 11, 19–27, 42–43, 65–69, 136–138; Mohaqqeq, 1382/2003, p. 13).Those early Arabic–Persian dictionaries compiled after Al-sorāh men al-sehāh that likewise share at least three low-frequency equivalents with it in the sense intended by Qarshi are presented in Table 2 (for the dates of composition of these works, see: Monzavi, 1337/1958, pp. 152, 169–171, 246; Mohtadi, 1393/2014, pp. 45–47).Table 1Classical Arabic–Persian Dictionaries Predating Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and Their Degree of Lexical OverlapTitleNumber of similar casesDegree of similarityTāj al-asāmi2527.17%Takmelat al-asnāf of Karamaini3436.95%Dastur al-loghat and al-merqāt of Adib Natanzi55.43%Qānun al-adab of Taflisi44.34%Ketāb al-masāder of Zuzani44.34%Lesān al-tanzil33.26%Moqaddamat al-adab of Zamakhshari1718.47%Table 2Classical Arabic–Persian Dictionaries Postdating Al-sorāh men al-sehāh and Their Degree of Lexical OverlapTitleNumber of similar casesDegree of similarityKholāsat al-loghāt of Jonābezi64.65%Dastur al-ekhvān of Dahhār1310.07%Montahā al-arab of Safipuri11085.27%5. ConclusionSome of the low-frequency Persian equivalents found in Al-sorāh men al-sehāh are also attested in Arabic–Persian dictionaries compiled both before and after it. This suggests that the author of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh was probably influenced by earlier dictionaries and that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh itself, in turn, influenced later lexicographical works. If rare words are taken as the statistical sample, it may be concluded that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh’s indebtedness to Takmelat al-asnāf and Tāj al-asāmi, as well as its influence on Montahā al-arab, is significant and worthy of closer examination in future research. Moreover, it should be noted that Al-sorāh men al-sehāh exhibits the highest degree of intertextual relations with Montahā al-arab.Bibliography Adib Natanzi, Badiʿ al-Zamān Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn. (1384/2005). Dastur al-loghat (ʿAli Ardalān Javān, Ed.). Beh-Nashr. [In Persian]Adib Natanzi, Badiʿ al-Zamān Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn. (1346/1967). Al-merqāt (Seyyed Jaʿfar Sajjādi, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]Dahhār, Qāżi Khān Badr Mohammad. (1349–1350/1970–1971). Dastur al-ekhvān (Saʿid Najafi Asadollāhi, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]Heydariān, Mohammad-Hosayn. (1397/2018). Introduction. In Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled Qarshi, Al-sorāh men al-sehāh (Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]Jonābezi, Mohammad Moʾmen ben Abu al-Hasan. (1393/2014). Kholāsat al-loghāt (Hosayn Mohtadi, Ed.). Majmaʿ-e Zakhāyer-e Eslāmi. [In Persian]Karamaini, ʿAli ben Mohammad ben Saʿid. (1385/2006). Takmelat al-asnāf (ʿAli Ravāqi, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]Lesān al-tanzil. (1382/2003). Mahdi Mohaqqeq (Ed.). Elmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]Mohaqqeq, Mahdi. (1382/2003). Introduction. In Lesān al-tanzil. Mahdi Mohaqqeq (Ed.). ʿElmi va Farhangi. [In Persian]Mohtadi, Hosayn. (1393/2014). Introduction. In Mohammad Moʾmen ben Abu al-Hasan Jonābezi, Kholāsat al-loghāt (Hosayn Mohtadi, Ed.). Majmaʿ-e Zakhāyer-e Eslāmi. [In Persian]Monzavi, A. (1337/1958). Arabic-to-Persian dictionaries. University of Tehran. [In Persian]Qarshi, Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled. (1382/2003). ʿOrāżat al-ʿArūżiyyin (Mohsen Zāker al-Hosayni, Ed.). Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān, Supplement 13. [In Persian]Qarshi, Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled. (1397/2018). Al-sorāh men al-sehāh (Mohammad-Hosayn Heydariān, Ed.). Anjoman-e Āthār va Mafākher-e Farhangi. [In Persian]Safipuri, ʿAbd al-Rahim ben ʿAbd al-Karim. (1397/2018). Montahā al-arab fi loghāt al-Arab: Arabic–Persian (ʿAlirezā Hājiān-Nezhād, Ed.). Sokhan. [In Persian]Sāhebi, Sayyed Mohammad. (1402/2023). A critique of the edition of Al-sorāh men al-sehāh. Kohan-Nāmeh-ye Adab-e Pārsi, 14(2), 197–229. https://doi.org/10.30465/CPL.2023.41615.3108.Tāj al-asāmi. (1367/1988). ʿAli Owsat Ebrāhimi (Ed.). Markaz-e Nashr-e Dāneshgāhi. [In Persian]Taflisi, Abu al-Fazl Hobaysh ben Ebrāhim ben Mohammad. (1350–1351/1971–1972). Qānun al-adab (Gholām-Reżā Ṭāher, Ed.). Bonyād-e Farhang-e Irān. [In Persian]Zāker al-Hosayni, Mohsen. (1382/2003). Introduction. In Jamāl al-Din Abu al-Fazl Mohammad ben Omar ben Khāled Qarshi, ʿOrāżat al-ʿArūżiyyin (Mohsen Zāker al-Hosayni, Ed.). Nāmeh-ye Farhangestān, Supplement 13. [In Persian]Zamakhshari, Jārallāh Abu al-Qāsem Mahmud. (1386/2007). Moqaddamat al-adab: Based on the Leipzig 1843 edition (Mahdi Mohaqqeq, Intro.). Institute of Islamic Studies, University of Tehran–McGill University. [In Persian]Zuzani, Abu ʿAbdollāh Hosayn ben Ahmad. (1374/1995). Ketāb al-masāder (Taqi Binesh, Ed.). Alborz. [In Persian]فرهنگ عربیـفارسی الصّراح من الصّحاح یکی از کتابهای جمالالدین ابوالفضل محمد قَرشی و ترجمهای ملخّص از تاجاللغة و صحاحالعربیة اثر ابونصر اسماعیلبن حماد جوهری است. قرشی این فرهنگ را در سال 700ق در کاشغر ماوراءالنهر بهاتمام رساند. محمدحسین حیدریان در ۱۳۹۷ش، الصّراح من الصّحاح را تصحیح و در دو مجلد منتشر کرد؛ این متن مصحَح مبنای پژوهش پیش رو است. در این مقاله با تمرکز بر بخشها و برابرنهادهای فارسی، واحدهای واژگانی کمکاربرد، نادر، برجسته و ارزندۀ این فرهنگ، به ترتیب الفبایی، ثبت و بررسی شدهاست؛ نخست معادل فارسی در قالب سرواژه، و سپس اصل عربی آن، یا اصل عربی همراه با تعریفِ حاویِ برابرنهاد، ثبت گردیدهاست و در صورت واضح و آشنا نبودنِ اصل عربی، با مراجعه به دیگر فرهنگها و منابع، تعریف یا مترادفی امروزی برای هر واحد واژگانی ارائه شدهاست. برخی از معادلهای فارسی کمکاربرد و نادر صراح در فرهنگهای عربیـفارسی پیش و پس از آن ضبط شدهاند؛ این نکته نشان میدهد که احتمالاً مؤلّف صراح از فرهنگهای پیش از خود تأثیر پذیرفته و صراح نیز بر فرهنگهای پس از خود تأثیر گذاشتهاست. برای نشان دادن این روابط بینامتنی، در ارجاعات هر مدخل به دیگر فرهنگهای کهن عربیـفارسی استناد شدهاست. در پایان مقاله، بهروش آماری، روابط بینامتنی صراح با سایر فرهنگهای عربیـفارسی قدیمی تحلیل گردیدهاست.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14063_1a62026e6b035b51682672932876a119.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823A dataset for Shirazi dialect: a cognitive approachاستخراج مجموع دادگان گویش شیرازی: رویکرد شناختی3573841408810.30465/lsi.2026.47515.1722FAمریمنورنمائیگروه زبان شناسی، دانشکده ادبیات، دانشگاه الزهرا، تهران، ونک، ایران0000-0001-7317-2020Journal Article20231124Abstract This research aimed to extract a textual corpus of basic vocabulary for the Shirazi dialect through a cognitive approach. The corpus of the basic vocabulary was developed by reviewing a Shirazi dialect dictionary based on the concept of cognitive categories, studying the semantic relations between the entries, and expanding the list of vocabulary through interviews with Shirazi native speakers. In this study, primary cognitive categories and semantic relations were taken into account. The concrete primary cognitive category consists of object, space, and action. The relative interaction of these categories formed the abstract cognitive category of event. Thus, the continuous interaction between concrete and abstract cognitive categories was represented based on the human role in this process. Following the analysis of various semantic relations between entries and the discovery of conceptual processes within the dictionaryʼs terminology, the primary concrete and abstract cognitive categories were identified and their lexical categories distinguished. Approximately 1,320 basic vocabularies for the Shirazi dialect were obtained. This list can be expanded through interviews and systematic questionnaires for the contemporary Shirazi dialect. The lexical categories of this corpus were selected from simple and derivative words as much as possible; multi-part and compound verbs were excluded from this list. Such verbs can be included and defined within the microstructure of simple verbs, nouns, adjectives, or prepositions, depending on their lexical structure.1. IntroductionBasic vocabulary is a core list of primary words in any language that resists change or total loss. These words are essential for developing educational, research, and lexicographic corpora (List, 2012). Across languages, words are directly linked to cultural conceptualization (Palmer, 1996), while words, expressions, and proverbs serve as the linguistic forms of mental concepts (Csabi & Kövecses, 2014; Evans & Green, 2006; Lakoff & Johnsen, 2003). For lexicographers, selecting and organizing entries to accurately reflect human mental structures has long been a challenge. By using the paradigm of cognitive linguistics can reveal a fundamental, shared order in the conceptualization of words across different languages when planning dialectal dictionaries. Accordingly, this research employs cognitive categorization to compile a basic vocabulary list for the Shirazi dialect.Human cognitive structure is shaped by the mindʼs imagery system through repetitive and dynamic patterns resulting from embodied experiences (Atkins, et. al., 2003; Talmy, 2019), perceptual interactions, and sensorimotor programs (Evans & Green, 2006). Cognitive categorization is a perceptual process operating at primary and middle levels within the hierarchy of conceptual domains (Croft & Cruse, 2004). Gärdenfors (2020) categorizes primary-level cognitive categories into two types: basic concrete categories (objects, space, actions) and basic abstract categories (events). While these categories are universal across languages, their encoding methods vary (ibid). Furthermore, the study of semantic relations at the middle level of cognitive categorization in Sepasdar Dictionary (2009) illustrates the underlying structure of concrete and abstract categories, considering human as a cultural entity within a permanent interaction between concrete and abstract categories.2. Literature ReviewThis part divides into two subcategories as follows:2.1. Basic Vocabulary in LexicographyLandau (1984) proposed a citation file instead of basic vocabulary in English. Swadesh (1971) compiled the first basic vocabulary list in English. Calude & Pagel (2014) suggested to use simultaneous multiple criteria for selecting basic vocabulary.2.2. Cognitive Categories and Semantic Relations (Conceptual Processes) in LexicographyList (2021) applied cognitive categorization to analyze semantic relations in ancient languages. Gao (2013) employed primary-level cognitive category concepts in compiling the Longman dictionary for English learners. According to Csabi and Kövecses (2014), expressions are linguistic categories larger than words and conceptual frames have roles in their constitution. Anonby et al. (2019) conducted a comparative study on a list of basic concepts within the conceptual domain of the pupil of the eye in Persian and English. Lu and Wei (2019) utilized prototype theory for polysemous entries in English learners' dictionaries3. MethodologyThe basic vocabulary list was compiled by utilizing the textual corpus of the Sepasdar dictionary (2009) and conducting interviews with speakers of the Shirazi dialect. A hybrid approach was used to establish the written corpus of primary-level cognitive categories by integrating the labeling of both lexical and cognitive categories. Synonymous basic vocabulary with Persian words were also included in this list. Each cognitive category consists of several subcategories. 4. ResultsA total of 24 categories were identified through the examination of dialectal dictionary entries and their semantic relations based on the cognitive categorization. Living beings, imaginary creatures, and objects constitute the primary concrete categories (16 categories), while events encompass the primary abstract categories (8 categories). Lexical items were also counted according to their frequency in the list as the following table shows:Table 1The Frequency and Types of Lexical Categories in the List of Basic Vocabulary in ShiraziNo.Type of Lexical CategoryFrequency1. Pronoun362. Noun8993. Adjective2444. Simple verb infinitive775. Adverb286. Particles36Total1320The primary concrete categories include living beings, imaginary creatures, body parts, physical states, natural phenomena, plants, inanimate objects, toys, mineral and chemical elements, urban spaces, cities, time, human actions, common actions between humans and animals, colors and characteristics. The primary abstract categories comprise kinship relations, foods, clothing, occupations, tools, ceremonies, games, and treatments. The mid-level cognitive categories include relations of hyponymy, synonymy, polysemy, semantic opposition, meronymy, and portion-mass.5. ConclusionThis study developed a textual corpus of the Shirazi dialect based on cognitive categories, resulting in a list of 1,320 basic vocabularies. This dataset can be utilized in designing questionnaires, dialectological studies, and diachronic analyses, such as assessing the extent of lexical borrowing. Furthermore, the analysis of mid-level semantic relations in this research has revealed the underlying conceptual structures within this dialect. This study emphasizes on the necessity of modern, theory-driven lexicography. Specifically, the creation of large-scale textual corpora and the investigation of cognitive processes, such as conceptual metaphors and the radial semantic structures in the other dialects as well as in Shirazi, are proposed as essential future directions.BibliographyAnonby, E., Taheri-Ardali, M., & Hayes, A. (2019). The Atlas of the Languages of Iran (ALI): A Research Overview. Iranian Studies, 52(1-2), 199-230. https://concepticon.clld.org/values/Anonby-2018-1500-10.Atkins, S., Fillmore, Ch., & Johnson, Ch. (2003). Lexicographic relevance: Selecting information from corpus evidence, International Journal of Lexicography, 16(3), 251-280, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/16.3.251.Calude, A., & Pagel, M. (2014). Frequency of use and basic vocabulary, In L. Filipovic & M. Pütz (Eds). Multilingual Cognition and Language Use. Processing and typological perspectives, John Benjamins Publishing Company.Croft, W., & Cruse, D. (2004). Cognitive linguistics. Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864.Csabi, S., & Kövecses, Z. (2014). Lexicography and cognitive linguistics, Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 27(1), 118-139. https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.27.1.05kov. Evans, V., & Green, M. (2006). Cognitive linguistics, Edinburg University Press.Gao, J. (2013). Basic cognitive experiences and definitions in the Longman dictionary of contemporary English. International Journal of Lexicography, 26 (1), 58-89, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecs01۴.Gärdenfors, P. (2020). Primary cognitive categories are determined by their invariances, Frontiers of Psychology, 11, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.584017.Lakoff, G., & Johnsen, M. (2003). Metaphors we live by. The university of Chicago press.Landau, S. (1984). The art and craft of lexicography, The Scribner Press.List, N. (2021). How can we investigate ancient Greek categories without the influence of our own? Exploring kinship terminology using word2vec, International Journal of Lexicography, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecab023. Lu, H., & Wei, X. (1990). Structuring polysemy in English learners’ dictionaries: A prototype theory-based model, International Journal of Lexicography, 32(1), 20-37, https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecy018.Palmer, G. (1996). Toward a theory of cultural linguistics, University of Texas Press, USA.Talmy, L. (2019). Cognitive semantics: An overview. In C. Maienborn, K. Heusinger & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics-theories (pp. 1-28). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/97831105892۴5-001.چکیدهاین پژوهش با هدف استخراج مجموع دادگان برای گویش شیرازی با رویکردی شناختی صورت گرفته است. منابع این پیکره از طریق نقد یک فرهنگ گویش شیرازی بر مبنای مفهوم مقولههای شناختی، بررسی روابط معنایی بین مدخلهای این فرهنگ و بسط فهرست واژهها از طریق مصاحبه با گویشوران شیرازی به دست آمد. مقولهبندی شناختی در دو سطح مقولههای شناختی اصلی و روابط معنایی صورت گرفت. مقولههای شناختی اصلی به سه مقولة مستقل اشیاء، فضا و کنش تقسیم شدند که سطح عینی این مقولهها را تشکیل دادند. تعامل نسبی این مقولهها با هم مقولة شناختی رویداد را در سطحی انتزاعی شکل داد. مقولههای شناختی اصلی فیزیکی و انتزاعی به تفکیک مقولههای واژگانی تعیین شدند. این مقولهها به ترتیب بسامد در پیکره عبارتاند از: مقولة واژگانی اسم (899 واژه)، صفت (244 واژه)، فعل (77 واژه)، ضمایر و حروف (36 واژه) و قید (28 واژه). در نهایت، حدود 1320 واژة پایه برای گویش شیرازی به دست آمد که میتوان از طریق انجام مصاحبه و تهیة پرسشنامههای نظاممند بر تعداد این واژهها در شیرازی امروز افزود. مقولههای واژگانی این پیکره تا حد امکان از میان واژههای بسیط و مشتق انتخاب شدهاند و فعلهای چندجزئی و فعلهای مرکب در این فهرست منظور نشدهاند. این قبیل فعلها را میتوان با توجه به ساختار واژگانی آنها، در بخش خردساختار فعلهای بسیط، اسم، صفت یا حروف اضافه درج و تعریف کرد.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14088_3af3d94fb6259a153cde3f009b02a81a.pdfانجمن زبان شناسی ایرانزبان و زبانشناسی23223847214220260823Multilingualism: A socio-linguistic and acquisitional approachچندزبانگی: رویکردی اجتماعی-زبانی و آموزشی، به قلم سارا بوشفلد، پاتریشیا رونان، مانولا ویدامانل، انتشارات پالگریو مکمیلان، 2023،XIV+343.3854021406710.30465/lsi.2026.54504.1842FAعلیرضا قلی فامیاندانشگاه پیام نورJournal Article20260424Abstract Multilingualism, which refers to the ability of an individual or a society to use two or more languages in various communication situations, is one of the important consequences of globalization and the expansion of contact between linguistic communities. This phenomenon is not simply an individual knowledge or skill, but also has widespread effects on the community level in the areas of education, identity, and culture. For this reason, it has become one of the main focuses of sociolinguistics in recent years. In this context, the present article introduces and reviews the book “Multilingualism: A sociolinguistic and acquisitional approach,” which aims to provide a comprehensive picture of the theoretical, social, and practical dimensions of this phenomenon in the contemporary world. The book is organized into four parts and fourteen chapters, covering a wide range of topics related to multilingualism. The book's opening chapters introduce the theoretical foundations of multilingualism, the distinction between individual and social multilingualism, and some common and incorrect notions about bilingualism, emphasizing the continuum view of language competence. Concepts such as language contact, code-switching, borrowing, translanguaging, and the roles of English in a multilingual world are then discussed and examined. The book further explores the social and practical dimensions of multilingualism in areas such as language policies, multiple identities, education, migration and asylum, new media, pop music, and linguistic perspectives in the public sphere. The final part is devoted to research methodology in multilingualism, introducing quantitative and qualitative approaches and emphasizing the importance of Internet data and linguistic corpora in contemporary analyses.چندزبانگی که به توانایی فرد یا جامعه در بهکارگیری دو یا چند زبان در موقعیتهای ارتباطی گوناگون اشاره دارد، یکی از پیامدهای مهم جهانیسازی و گسترش تماس میان جوامع زبانی به شمار میآید. این پدیده صرفاً دانش یا مهارتی فردی نیست، بلکه در سطح اجتماع نیز تأثیرات گستردهای در حوزههای آموزش، هویت و فرهنگ بهجا میگذارد و به همین دلیل در سالهای اخیر به یکی از محورهای اصلی زبانشناسی اجتماعی تبدیل شده است. در این چارچوب، مقالۀ حاضر به معرفی و بررسی کتاب «چندزبانگی: رویکردی اجتماعی-زبانی و آموزشی» میپردازد که با هدف ارائه تصویری جامع از ابعاد نظری، اجتماعی و کاربردی این پدیده در جهان معاصر تدوین شده است. کتاب در چهار بخش و چهارده فصل تنظیم شده و طیف گستردهای از موضوعات مرتبط با چندزبانگی را پوشش میدهد. در فصلهای آغازین کتاب، مبانی نظریِ چندزبانگی، تمایز میان چندزبانگی فردی و اجتماعی، و برخی تصورات رایج و نادرست در باره دوزبانگی مطرح شده و دیدگاه پیوستاری بودن توانش زبانی مورد تأکید قرار میگیرد. سپس مفاهیمی همچون تماس زبانها، رمزگردانی، وامگیری، ترازبانگی و نقشهای زبان انگلیسی در جهان چندزبانه مورد بحث و بررسی قرار میگیرد. در ادامه، کتاب به ابعاد اجتماعی و کاربردی چندزبانگی در حوزههایی مانند سیاستهای زبانی، هویتهای چندگانه، آموزش، مهاجرت و پناهندگی، رسانههای نوین، موسیقی پاپ و چشماندازهای زبانی در فضای عمومی میپردازد. بخش پایانی نیز به روششناسی پژوهش در چندزبانگی اختصاص دارد و ضمن معرفی رویکردهای کمّی و کیفی، بر اهمیت دادههای اینترنتی و پیکرههای زبانی در تحلیلهای معاصر تأکید میکند.https://lsi-linguistics.ihcs.ac.ir/article_14067_f4cfab7920e9cb176ab3b4e324d85f63.pdf