Publication Date: 2022
Language Related Research (23223081)13(2)pp. 587-621
Three types of meaning i.e., propositional, textual and interpersonal were acknowledged for language in the tradition of functional studies. In light of such appraoch, this study aims: 1) to describe different types of meanings of in (this) and ân (that) in Persian and, 2) to show that how basics of grammaticalization can be applied to provide a synchronic survey of the semantic variety of the aforementioned dectic expressions as discourse markers in Persian. On the basis of grammaticalization in terms of Traugott & Dasher (2002), this paper examines the different uses of these linguistic elements by looking at their propositional, textual and interpersonal meanings. The analysis indicates that in & ân are used exophorically, anaphorically and textually in their referential meaning and also used in the bridging contexts. Moreover, the investigation shows unlike ân, the semantic changes of in extends beyond the bridging contexts. So in (this) as a discourse marker, functions textually, subjectively and inter-ubjectively. Grammaticalization of the deictic expressions supports Traugott & Dasher's clines. However, indexicalizing speaker's spatial aspects, in & ân have impersonal subjective meaning. Therefore, Traugott & Dasher's semantic cline, should be modified in way of impersonal subjective > personal subjective > inter-subjective to describe the behavior of these linguistic elements in this respect. © 2022, Tarbiat Modares University. All rights reserved.
