SOME CONSIDERATIONS BESET WITH MORPHOLOGICO-LEXICAL PECULIARITIES OF THE TAJIK PREPOSITION BAR IN 18TH-CENTURY HISTORICAL PROSE WORKS (based on “Jahonkushoi Nodiri”, “Ubaydullohnoma”, “Tarikhi Abulfayzkhon”, “Alamoroi Nodiri”, and “Tuhfat-ul-khoni”)

1.1. The Significance of Diachronic Grammatical Analysis

Diachronic linguistics constitutes a foundational discipline dedicated to elucidating the evolutionary trajectories of languages across their phonological, lexical, and grammatical domains. Within this scope, the study of historical morphosyntax, and specifically the evolution of adpositions is of particular importance. Prepositions, as pivotal functional elements that encode grammatical relations, are subject to significant semantic and functional shifts throughout their diachronic development. Analysis of these transformations provides crucial insights into the underlying principles of language change and allows for the identification of broader evolutionary trends

1.2. The 18th Century as a Pivotal Period in Tajik Language History

The 18th century represents a period of significant complexity and transition in the history of Central Asia, particularly for the Tajik-speaking populations. This era was marked by the collapse of the Janid (Astarkhanid) dynasty, the military campaigns of Nader Shah Afshar, and the subsequent ascendancy of the Manghit dynasty in the Bukharan Emirate. These momentous political, social, and cultural transformations exerted a considerable influence on the Persian-Tajik literary language of the period. While the language of 18th-century historiography perpetuated the established conventions of the classical literary tradition, it also integrated elements from colloquial registers and regional vernaculars. Accordingly, an analysis of the language of this period is essential for delineating the features of the transition from the post-classical to the modern era in the history of the Tajik language

1.3. The Preposition bar as the Object of Investigation

Within the adpositional system of Persian-Tajik, the preposition bar constitutes one of the most archaic and polysemous elements. Derived from Old Persian (upariy) and Middle Persian (abar), bar has, in the course of its diachronic evolution, developed an extensive array of locative, temporal, and abstract functions, in addition to a variety of grammaticalized meanings

1.4. Research Aim and Objectives

The primary aim of this research is to describe and analyze the semantic and functional features of the preposition bar in the language of 18th-century historical works. The following objectives were set to achieve this aim:

– identify and collect examples of bar usage from the analyzed historical texts;

– classify the lexico-grammatical meanings of bar based on the collected examples;

– analyze the functions of bar in expressing locative, temporal, figurative, and abstract meanings;

– dwell on the role of bar as a word-forming component in compound verbs and determine its productivity;

– draw conclusions regarding the status and evolution of bar within the grammatical system of the Tajik literary language in the 18th century.

1.5. Empirical Basis and Scientific Contribution

The empirical basis of this investigation is a corpus comprising five major 18th-century historiographical works: “Jahonkushoi Nodiri” by Mirzo Mehdi Khan Astarabodi, “Ubaydullohnoma” by Mir Muhammad Amin Bukharoi, “Tarikhi Abulfayzkhon” by Abdurrahman Tali', “Alamoroi Nodiri” by Muhammad Kazim Marvi, and “Tuhfat-ul-khoni” by Muhammad Vafoi Karminagi. The above-mentioned historical productions representing prominent examples of the period's literary-historical prose, and provide a substantial and authentic dataset for analyzing the literary language of the era. The scientific contribution of this research resides in its novel, systematic analysis of the morphosyntactic and semantic functions of bar within this specific corpus, thereby elucidating previously unexamined aspects of Tajik historical grammar during this pivotal transitional period.

2.1. Research Methods

This study is predicated upon a combination of established linguistic methodologies. The principal method is descriptive-analytical, which is applied to the description and functional analysis of bar based on contextualized textual evidence. Concurrently, a comparative-historical method is employed to contextualize the 18th-century usage of bar against both earlier (Classical) and later (Modern Tajik) stages of the language in order to delineate its diachronic trajectory. Additionally, quantitative methods are employed judiciously to ascertain the frequency of specific semantic functions and grammatical patterns.

2.2. Research Materials

As previously noted, the primary research material is constituted by the texts of five 18th-century historiographical works:

1. “Tuhfat-ul-khoni” (Tarikhi Rahimkhoni) by Muhammad Vafoi Karminagi

2. “Tarikhi Abulfayzkhon” by Abdurrahman Tali'

3. “Jahonkushoi Nodiri” by Mirzo Mehdi Khan Astarabodi

4. “Alamoroi Nodiri” by Muhammad Kazim Marvi

5. “Ubaydullohnoma” by Mir Muhammad Amin Bukharoi

The rationale for the selection of this corpus is twofold: these texts are canonical examples of the 18th-century historiographical style, and they collectively furnish a rich and reliable dataset for grammatical investigation.

2.3. Data Collection and Analysis Procedure

The data collection and analysis were conducted through a multi-stage process. The initial stage involved a comprehensive reading of the source texts to systematically excerpt all occurrences of bar in its various functions (as both a preposition and a verbal component), resulting in a dataset of over 500 examples. Subsequently, the extracted attestations were classified according to their semantic-grammatical functions. In the final stage, each functional category was subjected to a detailed qualitative analysis, supported by specific textual examples and their corresponding contexts.

2.4. Analytical Framework

To facilitate a systematic analysis, the attested functions of bar were categorized into the following four principal domains:

1. Locative Functions: Expressing spatial relations (e.g., 'on,' 'upon,' 'against').

2. Abstract and Figurative Functions: Expressing notions of cause, purpose, basis, condition, etc.

3. Temporal Functions: Expressing temporal relations (observed to be less frequent in this period).

4. Function as a Verbal Prefix: The use of bar as an integral component of compound verbs (e.g., barxostan — 'to rise,' bardoštan — 'to lift/carry,' baromadan — 'to emerge/come out').

This analytical framework provides a structured approach for comprehensively investigating the polysemy and functional distribution of the adposition.

Analysis of the collected material from 18th-century historical works shows that the preposition bar was an extremely productive and polysemous unit during this period, performing a wide range of meanings and functions.

3.1. Locative (Spatial) Use of bar

The locative meaning is one of the oldest and most fundamental meanings of bar. In the analyzed works, this meaning is used abundantly in various forms.

3.1.1. Meaning "on", "upon"

This meaning is most often used to express the placement of something on the surface of something else.

Example 1: Sipohi garon bar teppae, ki mushrif bar qal'a bud, qaror giriftand va tūphoro omoda sokhtand — The mighty army settled on a mound overlooking the fortress and prepared the cannons

In this sentence, bar expresses the location of the army, meaning “on top of”, “upon”. This is the classical usage of the preposition, still active in modern Tajik, with the same meaning.

Example 2: Chun khon ba takhti saltanat nishast, amiron va akobiron bar zamin sajda ovardand — When the Khan sat on the throne of sovereignty, the emirs and nobles performed sajdah (prostration) bar zamin (on the ground)

Here, bar zamin indicates the location of the action's completion, meaning “on the ground”, also reflecting the ceremonial aspect.

3.1.2. Meaning “against”, “in opposition to”

One of the common meanings of bar in historical prose, often used in describing wars and struggles, is the meaning “against”:

Example 3: Ubaydullohhon lashkare buzurg jam' ovarda, bar qabilahoi isyongari turkman yurish oghoz namud — Ubaydullah Khan gathered a large army and launched an attack bar qabilahoi (against the) rebellious Turkmen tribes

Seemingly, the phrase bar qabilaho... yuriš oğoz namud expresses the direction of the attack, meaning “against”, “in opposition to”. This meaning is less common in modern Tajik today, largely replaced by the preposition ba or the phrase ba muqobili.

3.1.3. Meaning “at”, “by”

Example 4: Qosidoni amironi Hisor bar dari Arki Bukhoro rasida, muntaziri farmoni khon shudand — The messengers of the Emirs of Hisar arrived bar dari Arki (at the gate of the Ark) of Bukhara and awaited the Khan's order

So, the phrase bar dari Ark indicates the precise location of presence. This meaning, inherited from classical language, carries a formal and ceremonial nuance.

3.2. Figurative and Abstract Use of bar

In 18th-century works, bar was extensively used to express non-locative relations, i.e., figurative and abstract meanings, indicating its high semantic potential.

3.2.1. Expressing Basis and Cause (based on, because of)

Example 5: Ulamoi Bukhoro jam' omada, bar asosi dalelhoi shar'i fatvo dodand, ki islohoti pulii khon mukholifi shariat nest — The ulama of Bukhara gathered and issued a fatwa bar asosi (based on) shar'i evidence, stating that the Khan's monetary reforms were not contrary to Sharia

It is worth mentioning that the relevant preposition in the compound bar asosi serves to indicate the foundation and basis of an action (issuing the fatwa). This compound remains active in literary language today.

3.2.2. Expressing State and Condition (in a state of)

Example 6: Sipohi dushman dar holati pareshoni bud va bar in hol, hamlai nogahoni lashkari Nodir onhoro ba kulli shikast dod — The enemy army was in a state of disarray, and bar in hol (in this state), Nader's army's sudden attack completely defeated them

In the phrase bar in hol, it is used to describe the general state and condition of the enemy army. It means “in such a situation”, despite this”.

3.2.3. Expressing Benefit or Detriment (for the benefit of / to the detriment of)

Example 7: In tadbiri vazir, harchand dar zohir nek menamud, dar asl bar zarari podshoh va davlat bud — Although this vizier's plan seemed good outwardly, in reality it was bar zarari (to the detriment of) the king and the state

Proceeding from the assumption of the above-adduced sentence, one can assert that bar zarari expresses an adversarial relationship, showing that the result of the action is detrimental to someone or something. This pattern was also abundantly used in classical language.

3.3. Bar as a Verb-Forming Component (Prefix)

One of the most important and productive functions of the preposition bar in 18th-century works is its role as a verb-forming prefix. In this role, bar combines with verb roots to form numerous compound verbs with new lexical meanings or specific grammatical nuances. This characteristic indicates that bar was in an active phase of grammaticalization during this period: barxostan (to rise) — This verb primarily means “to stand up”, “to get up”, and figuratively “to rebel”, “to rise up”.

Example 8: Chun zulmi hokimi Samarqand az had guzasht, mardumi shahr yakdilona barkhostand va uro az shahr berun kardand — When the oppression of the Samarkand governor exceeded all bounds, the people of the city unanimously barxostand (rose up) and expelled him from the city

Here, barxostand means “rebelled”, “rose up”. The prefix bar adds the semantic nuance of sudden inception and upward movement to the root verb xostan.

The comprehensive analysis of the empirical data extracted from 18th-century historiographical texts enables the formulation of several significant theoretical conclusions regarding the status and function of the preposition bar during this pivotal period in the language's diachronic development.

4.1. The Polysemy and Multifunctionality of Bar

The findings of this research robustly demonstrate that bar functioned as a highly polysemous and multifunctional element in the 18th century. Its functional scope was not restricted to simple locative relations but extended to a wide spectrum of figurative, abstract, and complex syntactic functions. This observed polysemy attests to the significant semantic potential of this grammatical unit and confirms its integral role within the linguistic system of the period.

4.2. Bar as a Transitional Element: From Adposition to Prefix

A principal finding of this investigation is the identification of bar in an active state of transition along a grammaticalization pathway from an autonomous adposition to a bound verbal prefix. The data reveals a dual functionality:

– on one hand, bar continued to operate as an independent preposition;

– on the other, it was extensively employed as an inseparable component of compound verbs.

This diachronic process, wherein an independent lexical or syntactic unit is reanalyzed as a grammatical or derivational morpheme, represents a canonical instance of grammaticalization

4.3. Diachronic Comparison with Earlier and Later Periods

A diachronic comparison reveals significant shifts in the functional load of bar. In comparison to the Classical Persian period (10th–15th centuries), which marks the peak of its productivity, certain archaic meanings of bar exhibit diminished frequency in the 18th-century corpus. Nevertheless, its role as a verbal prefix remained highly productive. Conversely, when contrasted with Modern Standard Tajik, many of the functions and usage patterns of bar that were active in the 18th century have since become archaic or are restricted to elevated literary registers. The use of bar to denote 'against,' for instance, is now rare. This evidence indicates a gradual restriction of the preposition's functional scope over the past two centuries

The analysis of the morphosyntactic and semantic properties of the preposition bar within a corpus of major 18th-century historiographical texts — namely “Jahonkushoi Nodiri”, “Ubaydullohnoma”, “Tarikhi Abulfayzkhon”, “Alamoroi Nodiri” and “Tuhfat-ul-khoni” substantiates the following conclusions:

1. In the 18th-century literary language, the adposition bar functioned as a highly polysemous and multifunctional element, encompassing a broad spectrum of semantic domains, including locative (e.g., on, upon, against), figurative (e.g., based on, to the detriment of), and abstract relations.

2. A principal function of bar during this period was its role as a productive verbal prefix. It was integral to the derivation of numerous compound verbs (e.g., barxostan, bardoštan, baromadan), to which it contributed distinct semantic and aspectual properties.

3. The language of the 18th-century corpus documents a pivotal transitional stage in the diachronic trajectory of bar. This period is characterized by the ongoing grammaticalization of the element, as evidenced by its functional shift from an autonomous adposition to a bound, derivational morpheme.

4. In comparison to Modern Standard Tajik, the functional productivity of bar was demonstrably greater in the 18th century. This finding indicates a progressive restriction of its functional domain over the subsequent two centuries.

In a nutshell, the corpus of our study affirms that the diachronic analysis of adpositional systems, grounded in historical corpora, is of significant theoretical and methodological value for elucidating the principles that govern the evolution of the grammatical architecture of the Tajik language.