Introduction
Modality, as a language category that reflects the attitudes of language speakers toward the possibility or necessity of the proposition in an utterance, is encoded by either free or bound morphological elements. The work conducted so far on Modality in the Persian language generally state that Modal elements in Persian include categories such as Modal lexical verbs, Modal auxiliary verbs, Modal adverbs, mental state predicates, and also Modal adjectives and nouns. These categories are morphologically free and are considered as phrasal or periphrastic elements. In addition to these free categories, there is a bound or affixal Modal element in Persian that introduces various Modal concepts. This bound element is the particle "-ā". Modal particles and discourse markers are both subsumable under the broad category of pragmatic markers. While discourse markers concern the structure or form of discourse, have no effect on propositional content, and occur freely in different positions of the sentence, Modal particles are highly content-dependent, have a fixed scope, are subject to heavy syntactic restrictions, and, most importantly, introduce subjective notions. The Modal element "-ā" attaches to the end of utterances and introduces a wide range of deontic and epistemic Modal concepts such as command, request, warning, threat, objection, sarcasm, complaint, predicting unfavorable circumstances, prohibition, and assessing a situation with astonishment. In all of these diverse concepts, the epistemic and deontic commitment of the speaker is evident; therefore, these Modal concepts are considered as speaker-oriented or subjective.
Materials and method
Lyons (1977) is one of the pioneering and influential works on Modality. It proposes different types of Modality with respect to epistemic/deontic and subjective/objective dichotomies. Epistemic Modality concerns judgments about the truth of a proposition, while deontic Modality imposes or proposes a course of action or behavior on the addressee. On the other hand, subjective Modality indicates the speaker's commitment to the possibility, probability, and permission or obligation of the utterance, whereas objective Modality states the possibility, probability, and permission or obligation of the utterance based on objective facts.
This investigation is conducted as basic descriptive research, and the gathered data belong to colloquial style and are collected from informal conversations among ordinary speakers.
Results and discussion
The Modal particle "-ā" attaches to the end of utterances and introduces a wide range of deontic and epistemic Modal concepts. In following subsections, these notions are introduced and exemplified.
3.1. Deontic concepts
Notions such as command, request, threat, warning, sarcasm, complaint, and objection are among the deontic concepts stated by Modal affix 'ā'.
3.1.1. Command
(1) Passenger: mi-ʃe ye daqiqe be-r-am o bar-gard-am?
PROG-become one minute SUBJN-go-1SG and back-turn-1SG
Can I go out and return a minute?
Driver: bo-ro … be-bin zud umad-i-'ā'.
IMPR-go … IMPR-see soon come-PST- 2SG- 'Modal affix'
Go. … Look, come back soon.
3.1.2. Request
(2) - be-bin man mi-r-am o zud bar-mi-gard-am.
IMPR-see I PROG-go-1SG and soon back-PROG-turn-1SG
Look, I will go and turn back soon.
baše vali zud bi-a-i-'ā'
all right but soon SUBJN-com-2SG-'Modal affix'
All right but come back soon, please.
3.1.3. Threat
(3) mi-zan-am-'ā'
PROG-hit-1SG-'Modal affix'
(Stop it, or) I will hit you.
3.1.4. Warning
(4) liz na-xor-i-'ā'
slip NEG-eat-2SG-'Modal affix'
(Be careful!) Don't slip.
3.1.5. Sarcasm
(5) ye mowqe soraq-i az mā na-gir-i-'ā'
one time seek-INDEF from we NEG-take-2SG-'Modal affix'
Don't seek us out at all! (Why don't you come to visit us?)
3.1.6. Objection
(6) be-baxš-id-'ā' (un mowqe ke man jun mi-kan-d-am to koʤā bud-i?)
IMPR-forgive-2PL-'Modal affix' (that time that I soul PROG-extract-PST-1SG you where be-PST-2SG)
Hey, (when I worked hard, where were you?)
3.2. Epistemic Concepts
Modal particle '-ā' introduces epistemic Modal meanings like predicting unfavorable circumstances and assessing a situation with astonishment.
3.2.1. Predicting unfavorable circumstances
(7) (be ketri dast na-zan) mi-suz-i-'ā'
(of kettle hand NEG-IMPR-hit) PROG-burn-2SG-'Modal affix'
(Don't touch the kettle) You will be burned.
3.2.2. Assessing a situation with astonishment
(8) hesāb-i ʧāq ʃod-i-'ā'
much-INDEF fat become-2SG-'Modal affix'
You have got so fat.
Conclusion
In all of the above mentioned diverse concepts, the epistemic commitment of the speaker to the possibility or probability of the occurrence of the event, or the deontic commitment of the speaker to the permission or obligation of the propositional content of the utterance, is clear; therefore, these Modal concepts are considered as speaker-oriented or subjective. One of the characteristics of the Modal particle "-ā" is that it applies on the entire simple or complex sentence, not just the verb or predicate. Another fact is that the Modal particle "-ā" is heavily context-dependent, with the situational context influencing the resultant concepts. Finally, the Modal particle "-ā" is predominant only in the spoken colloquial style of Persian, and this fact may explain its failure to attract proper attention from scholars.