ИСТИНА

In the works of well-known Russian iranianists A. Arends, L. Peysikov and ‎Yu. Rubinchik a coherent system for the description of the Persian syntax ‎from the level of word collocations to complex sentences was developed. With ‎some reservations, this system can be applied to closely related languages: Ta‎jik and Dari, as well as their dialects. More elementary syntax level – the connection of clitics and function words with the other words (subsyntax) – was ‎not taken into account at all. The purpose of this article is to fill the mentioned ‎gap, and to revise those parts of the syntax theory that are responsible for the ‎docking of subsyntax with the higher levels – syntax of collocations and sentences Syntactic connection between notional and functional words is unequal and is ‎of a subordinate nature. Upon closer inspection inside this category on the ‎subsyntax level three subtypes are found.‎ ‎1. Ezafe (non-predicative) connection. According to the beliefs of L. Peysikov ‎the combinations like lab-e daryā ‘at the sea shore’ unlike lab-e man ‘my lip’ ‎is not a collocation. The reason for this is the erosion of the lexical meaning of ‎the word lab ‘lip’ and turning it into a function word.‎ However, the ezafe marker in the combination lab-e daryā ‘at the sea shore’ ‎can be seen clearly, and its function is the link between two words. The first ‎one became a preposition (a function word) and occupies the vertex position in ‎the ezafe collocation. The second one is a noun and occupies the dependent po-sition. Grammatically, the second one extends the first one, semantically – vice ‎versa. The word order is not a decisive factor here, because there are ezafe col-‎locations with the reverse arrangement of the members, like sāyer-e rofaqā ‎‎‘other comrades’, where the first word sāyer ‘the rest’ grammatically occupies ‎the vertex position, and semantically it is the specifier of the second word ‎rofaqā ‘comrades’.‎‏ ‏ ‎2. Adjunction. All other cases can be reduced to this type of non-predicative ‎connection between the function words:‎ ‎(a) Connection of a pronominal enclitic to a preposition: barāye-šān ‘for ‎them’; beh-et ‘to you’.‎ ‎(b) Connection of a prefix to the verb foru-raftan ‘to sink’.‎ ‎(c) Connection of the preposition to a noun dar šahr ‘in the town’.‎ ‎(d) The connection of the indefinite article to a noun: šahr-i ‘a city’; dānešju-yi ‎‎‘one student’. The article and the pronominal enclitic are mutually exclusive in ‎the position after a noun: either xāne-i ‘a house’ or xāne-yaš ‘his house’. Se‎mantics plays the main role in this exclusion: the article makes the subject in-‎definite, but a pronominal enclitic makes it definite.‎ ‎(e) The connection of the postposition -rā to a noun: tasvir-rā ‘the picture + ‎Acc.’, asb-rā ‘the horse + Acc.’. The postposition perfectly combines with the ‎pronominal enclitic, and with the indefinite article: gusfand-i-rā ‘some sheep + ‎Acc.’ ↔ gusfand-aš-rā ‘his sheep + Acc.’. However, in relation to the noun it ‎occupies a more distant position than the other clitic. This order cannot be vio-‎lated.‎ ‎(f) The connection of a coordinative conjunction to a nominal part of speech: ‎si-vo do ‘thirty-two’. Enclitical conjunction -o/-vo/-yo ‘and’ can act as a purely ‎bilateral link.‎ ‎(g) The connection of subordinating conjunction -ke to a notional part of ‎speech in the clause: Zan-i-ke āmad... ‘the woman who came...’. The noun that ‎refers to a subordinate clause can be expanded by an adjective, and complex -i-‎ke (article + conjunction) can be combined with the postposition -rā: Zan-e ‎javān-i-rā-ke didam... ‘a young woman I have seen...’. This conjunction also ‎establishes a two-way connection.‎ ‎(h) The connection of a particle to a notional part of speech: čār-tā ‘four piec-‎es’. The particle is closer to the noun than the pronominal enclitic and postpo-‎sition: čār-tā-šun-o ‘the four of them + Acc.’. Other particles may be placed ‎farther from the noun: Čār-tā-šun-o-am-ke nadidam ‘I, too, saw four of them’. ‎In this example, we see that, firstly, the particle -ke ‘for some one’s sake’ is ‎combined with a particle -tā ‘piece’, and, secondly, separated from it by the ‎pronominal enclitic -ešān ‘them’, the postposition -rā and the conjunction -‎ham ‘also’.‎ In addition to subcollocations, i.e. non-predicative combinations of function ‎words, there are also capsules, i.e. several types of phonetic words with weak ‎internal word boundaries, which are characterized by the presence of predicativity, for example: dide-i ‘you have seen’ (Perfect), var-eš dār ‘take it away’, ‎goftam-eš ‘I told him’, nist-eš ‘he is not here’, To-yi? ‘Is that you’? The classification of the capsules will be discussed in another paper.‎