ABSTRACT

This paper deals with the grammatical and semantic development of a modal verb in four West Iranian languages: gu/ga in Kahangi, gijabon in Semnani, boGostæn/bogostæn in the Takestan dialect of Tati and goan in Vafsi. Field work data demonstrate that, from the perspective of the grammaticalization and (inter)subjectification literature, this verb in these languages poses a challenge. It occurs as a non-grammaticalized full verb and as a grammaticalized auxiliary. Yet the full verb features an arguably more (inter)subjectivized meaning than the auxiliary: the former expresses volition, the latter dynamic, deontic and epistemic modal meanings. The absence of historical data for these languages does not allow the puzzle to be resolved directly, but a comparison with the modal verb hoeven ‘need’ in Dutch, which in the present-day language has properties similar to those of the Iranian verbs, and which has been investigated diachronically, suggests a solution: the present situation may be the result of a convoluted diachronic evolution, in which the semantic and grammatical developments do not align. The case thus demonstrates that one cannot easily draw conclusions from synchronic observations about diachronic relations between forms and/or meanings.

摘要

本文讨论了四种伊朗西部语言中情态动词的语法和语义发展： Kahangi 中的gu / ga、Semnani中的 gijabon、Tati 和 goan 的塔克斯坦方言中的boGostæn / bogostæn在瓦夫西。实地工作数据表明，从语法化和（互）主体化文献的角度来看，这些语言中的这个动词构成了挑战。它作为非语法化的完整动词和语法化的助动词出现。然而，完整动词的特征可以说比助动词更具有（间）主观化的意义：前者表达意志，后者表达动态的、道义的和认知的模态意义。由于缺乏这些语言的历史数据，因此无法直接解决难题，而是与情态动词hoeven进行比较荷兰语中的“需要”在当今语言中具有与伊朗动词相似的属性，并且已经过历时研究，提出了一个解决方案：目前的情况可能是一个复杂的历时演变的结果，其中语义和语法发展不一致。因此，这个案例表明，人们不能轻易地从关于形式和/或意义之间的历时关系的共时观察中得出结论。