Grammaticalization provides a framework to study the genesis and development of grammatical forms in language. In this framework, it is argued that new grammatical forms are constantly developed from lexical items and the already formed grammatical items may go out of use. In spite of some counterexamples, this is often seen as a unidirectional and cyclic process. In this article the concepts of cycle and unidirectionality are touched upon. An emphasis is put on the nature of semantic change in Grammaticalization. This is a point where Grammaticalization and some frameworks of cognitive linguistics converge. In this connection, the framework of metaphorical extension is elaborated on. On the basis of this latter framework, some instances of Grammaticalization in New Persian are touched upon. Our evidence shows that metaphorical extension plays a crucial role in the process of Grammaticalization. The change from concrete to abstract meaning in the process of Grammaticalization, as seen in metaphorical extension, is in line with the concept of unidirectionality. This kind of semantic change is almost without exception in New Persian.

Modal verbs are a group of helping verbs that represent modal concepts in relation to the main verb and are the result of the occurrence of Grammaticalization, the process by which the grammatical items are created. In this study we investigate the Grammaticalization of modal verb vastǝn (have to) in Gilaki, one of the Iranian languages of the western branch. Gilaki is a language with poor historical data, so we use Hopper's principles of gammaticalization (1991) as the main framework of the research to identify cases of Grammaticalization. We also use the concepts word order, reanalysis, analogy and desemanticization. We measure the effectiveness of these principles and in some cases we present an alternative analysis. In this paper after introducing the theoretical framework, we analyze the data. The results show that with regard to borrowing of modal element of obligation from Persian to Gilaki, two functional items including modal element of tendency and negation element are specific for Gilaki. Changing in the imperative mood system is the most important result that is obtained through Grammaticalization of modal verb vastǝn which makes Gilaki different from other Iranian languages.

In the process of Grammaticalization, a lexical item changes into a grammatical one, or an already grammatical item acquires more grammatical properties. Efforts have been made to isolate the mechanisms and principles underlying or accompanying Grammaticalization. In this article, such mechanisms and principles are thoroughly examined. It is worth noting that a concept subsumed under mechanisms by one scholar may be considered as a principle in another framework. To avoid this kind of confusion, here only the common principles and mechanisms accepted by most linguists are touched upon. Therefore, the principles presented in this article are based on the classic article of Hopper (1991) and the related mechanisms are those described by Wischer (2006). Examples, mostly from Persian language, are also provided for each principle or mechanism. A thorough understanding of these principles and mechanisms can help us to identify the instances of Grammaticalization in language. This in turn gives us useful insights as to the nature of changes in language. The availability of texts belonging to different periods is of great help in identification of instances of Grammaticalization. However, here we show that by a good understanding of (especially) the principles of Grammaticalization, one can rather easily identify the instances of Grammaticalization even in those languages without a written tradition.

Languages are dynamic and they are constantly changing. Words are not static too and every language manipulates them to fulfil its needs. Grammaticalization is a process to manipulate words and use them in grammar. When a free word grammaticalizes, it could be used as a grammatical form. Grammaticalization process can make a grammatical form more grammatical, too. This paper discusses the Grammaticalization of “ mar” in New Persian. For this research, a corpus of 70 books in 127 volumes is used. These books are written between 4th-14th (Islamic Era) centuries. We searched for the use of “ mar” and “ mar … rā ” in the corpus. The analysis shows that this word was used highly in 4th, 5th and 6th centuries. Both of these forms are used as markers of different semantic roles. The frequency of different semantic roles in each century is calculated and the Grammaticalization path is envisaged.

One of the internal factors of linɡuistic chanɡes is the ɡrammaticalization (also known as ɡrammaticization or ɡrammatization), a process by which a previously free and independent word ɡains a ɡrammatical function and status. Historical studies indicate that most auxiliaries in many lanɡuaɡes of the world, includinɡ New Persian, have already been lexical verbs, and their use in the role of auxiliary verbs is the result of auxiliation. This article shows on a parallel with what happened in the evolution of Middle Persian, that is, the lexical verb [xwāstan] ʻwantʼ becominɡ an auxiliary verb, was used to represent the concept of the future, in some Middle and New Iranian lanɡuaɡes, especially the Central Dialects of Iran, the denominative verb [kāmīdan] ʻwantʼ was ɡrammaticalized into a future tense marker. But with the fundamental difference that in these lanɡuaɡes the verb [kāmīdan] with the loss of its lexical use as independent verb, has become compeletely an auxiliary verb or particle

In one of dialects of Turkish, so called Azarbaijani, some postpositions not only have grammatical function but also serve as lexical categories in some contexts. There is an underlying assumtion that the mentioned postpositions are formed out of lexical items such as nouns and adjectives through Grammaticalization. Grammaticalization is a process through which lexical items and constructions turn up in certain linguistic contexts to serve as grammatical functions, and, once grammaticalized, they continue to develop new grammatical functions. Forms do not shift abruptly from one category to another, but go through a series of small transitions, transitions that tend to be similar across languages. These transitions can be shown in a cline of grammaticality as follows (the overlapping stages of Grammaticalization form a chain generally called a cline): content item> grammatical word> clitic > inflectional affix. Each item to the right is more grammatical but less lexical compared with its partner to the left. In this article some postpositions of Azerbaijani Turkish have been studied in corpus; the basis of analysis is Grammaticalization framework introduced by Hopper. Hopper introduces five cross-linguistic principles that enable linguists to recognize Grammaticalization cases in different languages without relying on historical data. These principles are as follows: 1) layering: within a broad functional domain, new layers are continually emerging; as this happens, the older layers are not necessarily discarded, but coexist and interact with new layers. 2) Divergence: when a lexical form undergoes Grammaticalization to a clitic or affix, the original lexical form may remain as an autonomous element and undergo the same changes as ordinary lexical items. 3) Specialization: within a functional domain, at one stage a variety of forms with slight semantic differences might emerge; as Grammaticalization takes place, this variety of form choices narrows and the fewer number of forms selected indicates more general grammatical meaning. 4) Persistence: When a form undergoes Grammaticalization from a lexical to a grammatical function, so long as it is grammatically viable, some traces of its lexical meanings tend to adhere to it, but details of its lexical history might be reflected in constraints on its grammatical distribution. 5) De-categorialization: through the process of grammaticaliation, morphological markers as well as syntactic features (such as Noun or Verb) pertaining to some forms are either lost or neutralized; but instead the characteristics of secondary categories such as Adjective, Participle, Preposition, etc, are presumably attributed. As mentioned some postpositions in Azerbaijani Turkish along with their grammatical functions, are used as autonomous elements such as Noun or Adjective as well; according to our assumption this can be due to grammaticaliztion of these elements to postpositions. The purpose of the present research is to describe the validity of the above hypothesis by using the Hopper's Grammaticalization principles. In this regard, we adopted a field-library method for collecting data. For studying postpositions in context, 100 sentences containing postpositions were extracted from Azari corpus which contains contemporary written texts. Then the samples of Grammaticalization were analyzed applying Hopper`s principle. This paper deals with identifying and analyzing eight cases of grammaticalized postpositions including Ajrµ , kimi, sArµ , irQli, GArtSµ , doÄ ru, ytSyn, ilQ. Having studied the change process of these words in terms of the principles of Grammaticalization, it was revealed that a number of proper postpositions are as the result of Grammaticalization out of other categories such as nouns and adjectives. Some of postpositions have lost their primary role, while some of them in spite of accepting a new role as postposition, have retained their original role. It has been observed that in some cases these postpositions have lost their original lexical meaning, and in contemporary Turkish, they only have a grammatical function. The process followed by these words is justifiable by the principle of decategorization; according to this principle the basic categories lose their characteristics and take the characteristics of the secondary categories. In other cases, the lexical categories, while preserving their original lexical meaning, they also take the function of postposition as the result of Grammaticalization. So it can also be explained by the principle of divergence. The divergence and decategorization of these cases show that the Grammaticalization of these cases is still in the initial phase of Grammaticalization (content item> grammatical word). For the case of ilQ, due to the deletion of instrumental case-marking-nin the contemporary Turkish, its function has been granted to ilQwhich is the consequene of the Grammaticalization. This postposition also undergo the process of cliticalization which, with regard to the Grammaticalization cline, can eventually be replaced with the old and abandoned case-marking suffix. Thus, in Azerbaijani Turkish, by means of Grammaticalization, the required grammatical categories are reproduced; this process can be seen in 7 other cases that are still in the initial phase of Grammaticalization.

In Persian and most of New Western Iranian languages also known as Iranian dialects, plurality is marked by – ā n inherited from Western Middle Iranian plural marker. This marker derives from the genitive plural ending-ā nā m, or by – ā from Middle Persian-ī hā , originally an abstract marker, developed as a plural marker in inanimate words. In some other languages like Talyshi, Semnani, Balochi, and Zazaki which have preserved at least a two-case system, the plural is marked by case ending which is used to distinguish not only cases but also number. There are six groups of Iranian languages that show an innovative form of the plural suffix-gal taken from a collective suffix. The suffix has been formed as a result of Grammaticalization of a collective noun gal “ group, bound” . The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate how the – gal or its allomorphs has been formed by Grammaticalization of gal “ group, band” . Traditionally Grammaticalization refers to the increase of the range of a morpheme advancing from a lexical to a grammatical or from a less grammatical to a more grammatical status, for example, from a derivative formant to an inflectional one. But in its broadest sense, it refers to the process by which grammar is created. In other words, it offers an explanatory account of how and why grammatical categories arise and develop...

In Modern Persian, different forms of the verb “ goftan” (meaning “ to say” ) are used as grammatical tools for denoting modality. Some of these forms such as “ gu” , “ gu’ i” , “ gofti” , “ gu’ iyâ ” and “ guyâ ” went through historical changes and were used as modal adverbs in Persian literary texts and among them, “ gu’ i” and “ guyâ ” are still common. In Modern Persian, there are other forms of the verb “ goftan” such as “ begu” , “ nagu” and “ begu’ i” , which function as modals in certain contexts. In this paper, we studied the semantic features of the verb “ goftan” in texts belonging to different stages of Persian language from Old Persian to Modern Persian and we also tracked the process of Grammaticalization of certain forms of the verb “ goftan” to show how they changed into modal adverbs. Based on our findings, “ gu’ i” has been used for purposes such as simile and allegory to represent imaginary and unreal statements and “ guyâ ” has had a modal role to represent doubt and uncertainty of the speaker. Both forms are still in use. Moreover, some forms of the verb “ goftan” are in the middle stages of Grammaticalization. These forms represent the modalities of inference, conjecture, assumption, and imagination, but some of them are gradually losing their verbal characteristics and are changing into adverbs to represent modality.

In the Persian literary texts, the verb hesht and its present stem helhave been used with mood's lexical meanings and grammatical function. On the other hand, the past stem of the verb is used in the form helid that is analogical formation. In this article, the root of the verb in the old period of Iranian languages; its main meaning, and other lexical meanings in three periods of Persian language has been examined and the process of semantic evolution and its change to grammatical form for representing modal concept has been described. Hiš tan is derived from root harz in Avestan Language to meaning “ to abandon” , “ to leave” and in Middle Persian and Persian literary texts besides "abandoning" mean, is used to mean "putting", "assigning", and "appointing" and also. Moreover, it has become a tool to express the permission modality in Middle Persian. In the Persian literary texts, gozā shtan has also represented the modal concept of permission. Gradually, the use of gozā shtan for denoting this concept has become dominant, and heš tan has become eliminated.

In Modern New Persian, two adverbs “ engâ r” and “ engâ ri” are used to represent irrealis modality when the speaker introduces a simile or a parable or expresses doubt and uncertainty about what he/she says. Some grammarians consider “ engâ ri” as two other adverbs “ guyi” and “ pendâ ri” . They believe that these adverbs are originated in second-person singular verbs which have acquired adverbial function. In this article, we will discuss the process of Grammaticalization of the two adverbs “ engâ r” and “ engâ ri” using evidence from ancient texts written in Persian (either verse or prose post-Islamic texts) and Middle Persian, focusing on semantic changes the verb “ hangā r-/ hangā rd” has gone through: In Middle Persian, “ hangā r-/ hangā rd” is a lexical verb meaning “ to consider” . After going through certain semantic changes, the verb obtains the meanings “ to count” and “ to assume” . Later on, the second-person singular imperative form of the verb shifts to the beginning of the clause which leads the noun phrase object to be replaced by a subordinate clause. Such changes speed up the progress of Grammaticalization and make it easier for “ engâ r” to be reanalyzed as an adverb. After being decategorized, “ engâ r” is used as a modal adverb to indicate hypothetical actions and irrealis modality. On the other hand, there is a grammatical rule in Middle Persian according to which, the morpheme “ ē ” can be added to present stem of the verbs to construct the optative mood mainly functioning as a device to imply irrealis modality. This applies to “ engâ ri” which is reanalyzed as an adverb indicating simile, allegory, doubt and uncertainty since in New Persian, modality is more expressed by linguistic devices such as modal verbs and adverbs than the verb moods. Phonological changes lead speakers to reanalyze “ engâ ri” and consider it to be originated from second-person singular verb due to resemblance in orthography and pronunciation.