This article investigates the use and frequency of what I refer to as the K-suffixes -ō/-ū/-o in the Shirazi dialects, namely, Old and Modern Shirazi. It shows that the use of K-suffixes as definiteness markers is more highly developed in Modern Shirazi than in Old Shirazi. In Old Shirazi, the K-suffix, with its original evaluative meaning, demonstrated some degree of multi-functionality. This has mostly been lost in Modern Shirazi, and the suffix is now used to express definiteness. The high frequency of use of the K-suffix appears to be independent of genre, speaker, and speech setting. Data from a corpus of written texts in Old Shirazi, mainly comprised of poems, are quantitatively analysed, along with data from a corpus of spoken Shirazi narratives and data from a questionnaire answered by ten speakers. The results show that an evaluative suffix can develop into a definiteness marker by passing through a stage of combination with deictic markers, which paves the way for extending the use of the K-suffix to include non-deictic anaphoric tracking. This article concludes that the development of definiteness marking can proceed down a pathway that is distinct from the one normally assumed for demonstrative-based definiteness marking, even if the endpoint may be similar. The detailed documentation of this process presented here is a further contribution to Iranian studies, and augments the small group of well-documented cases of a non-demonstrative origin of definiteness marking cross-linguistically.

本文研究了我所说的 K 后缀 - ō /- ū/-o的使用和频率设拉子方言，即古设拉子和现代设拉子。这表明，现代设拉子中 K 后缀作为确定性标记的使用比旧设拉子中更加发达。在老设拉子中，K后缀以其原本的评价意义，表现出了一定程度的多功能性。现代设拉子中这一点已基本消失，后缀现在用于表达明确性。K 后缀的高使用频率似乎与流派、说话者和演讲环境无关。对主要由诗歌组成的古设拉子书面文本语料库中的数据、设拉子口头叙述语料库中的数据以及十位发言者回答的问卷中的数据进行了定量分析。结果表明，评价性后缀经过与指示指示标记组合的阶段可以发展为确定性标记，这为K后缀的使用扩展到包括非指示指示照应跟踪铺平了道路。本文的结论是，确定性标记的发展可以沿着一条不同于通常假设的基于示范的确定性标记的路径进行，即使终点可能相似。这里介绍的这一过程的详细记录是对伊朗研究的进一步贡献，并补充了一小群有据可查的跨语言确定性标记的非示范性起源案例。本文的结论是，确定性标记的发展可以沿着一条不同于通常假设的基于示范的确定性标记的路径进行，即使终点可能相似。这里介绍的这一过程的详细记录是对伊朗研究的进一步贡献，并补充了一小群有据可查的跨语言确定性标记的非示范性起源案例。本文的结论是，确定性标记的发展可以沿着一条不同于通常假设的基于示范的确定性标记的路径进行，即使终点可能相似。这里介绍的这一过程的详细记录是对伊朗研究的进一步贡献，并补充了一小群有据可查的跨语言确定性标记的非示范性起源案例。