Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=rj8BbIwU3xn2ZYFEEMqunPz5qc4nJVeNUXsaVhoe3j0&_path=id%3D301460%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Den%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Compound Formation in Karachay-Balkar: Implications for the marker –sI

Year 2017, Volume: 28 Issue: 2, 21 - 41, 29.12.2017

Aslı Gürer

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.301460

Abstract

This paper discusses morphological, phonological, semantic
and syntactic properties of compound formation in Karachay-Balkar with a
special focus on Noun-Noun compounds which surface with or without marker –sI and sheds new light on compound
formation in Turkish. In line with Öztürk and Taylan (2016), we suggest that –sI signals the presence of an argument
being the head of functional head nP. Karachay-Balkar is more restrictive than
Turkish in that –sI surfaces only
with nouns that are inherently transitive. In this paper we also focus on the
function of –sI in genitive
possessive constructions. Drawing on compounds in Karachay-Balkar and Turkish,
we conclude that although –sI
introduces an argument in both genitive possessive constructions and compounds,
what appears on the head noun in genitive possessive constructions is
possessive agreement marker on a par with first and second person agreement
markers.
   

Keywords

Karachay-Balkar compounds lexical relations genitive-possessive constructions

References

  • Aslan, E. & A. Altan. 2006. The Role of -(s)I in Turkish Indefinite Noun Compounds. Dil Dergisi 131: 57-76.
  • Barker, C. (1995). Possessive Descriptions. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
  • Boz, E. ve Günay Aktaş, S. (2016). Diasporada Karaçay Türkçesinin kullanımı Eskişehir örneği. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 5(1), 145-155.
  • Bozşahin, C.( 2002). The Combinatory Morphemic Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 28: 145-186.
  • Çağatay, S. (2012). Karaçayca birkaç metin. Ankara Dil Tarih ve Coğrafya Dergisi, 277-300.
  • Dede, M. (1978). A Syntactic and Semantic Analysis of Turkish Nominal Compounds. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Michigan.
  • Göksel, A. (2009). Compounds in Turkish. Lingue e Linguaggio 2: 213-236.
  • Göksel, A. and Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London-New York: Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Haznedar, B. (2008). Türkçe tamlamaların yapısı: Bir veri tabanı çalışması [The structure of Turkish compounds: A database study]. In Y. Aksan & M. Aksan (Eds.), XXI. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri [Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Linguistics]. Mersin: Mersin University Publications. (pp. 362-364)
  • Hayasi, T. (1996). The Dual Status of Possessive Compounds in Modern Turkish, in Á. Berta, B. Brendemoen, & C. Schönig (eds.) Symbolae Turcologicae 6. Uppsala: Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul. 119-129.
  • Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish Grammar. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Kharytonava, O. (2010). Turkish Noun Compounds in Distributed Morphology. Paper presented at the Banff Workshop on Nominal Dependents. May 8-9, Banff.
  • Kharytonava, O. (2011). Noms Composés en Turc et Morphème -(s)I. Ph.D Dissertation, The University of Western Ontario.
  • Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish Grammar. London: Routledge.
  • Kunduracı, A. (2013). Turkish Noun-Noun Compounds: A Process-based Paradigmatic Account. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Calgary.
  • Öztürk, B. and Taylan, E. E. (2016). Possessive constructions in Turkish. Lingua 182, 88-108.
  • Partee, B. (1983/1997). Uniformity vs. versatility: The genitive, a case study. Appendix to Theo Janssen (1997), compositionality. In: van Benthem, J., ter Meulen, A. (Eds.), The Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier, New York, pp. 464--470.
  • Partee, B. and Borschev, V. (2003). Genitives, relational nouns, and argument--modifier ambiguity. In: Lang, E., Maienborn, C., Fabricius-Hansen, C. (Eds.), Modifying Adjuncts. Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 67--112.
  • Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Schroeder, C. (1999). The Turkish Nominal Phrase in Spoken Discourse. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Seegmiller, S. (1996). Karachay. Lincolm.
  • Siewierska, A. (2008). Person forms. In: Song, J.J. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Spencer, A. (1991). Morphological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Swift, L. (1963). A Reference Grammar of Modern Turkish. Bloomington: Indiana University.
  • Tavkul, U. (2004). Modern Karaçay-Malkar Edebiyatının Doğuşu ve Gelişmesi (Sürgün Yıllarından Günümüze Kadar). Kırım Dergisi, 13 (49), 32-36.
  • Tavkul, U. (2007). Karaçay-Malkar Türkçesi. In Ercilasun A. B. (Ed.), Türk Lehçeleri Grameri. Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları.
  • Tokyürek, H. and Pekacar, Ç. (2014). Eski Türkçeden günümüze eksiz ad tamlaması meselesi. Dil Araştırmaları (15), 9-38.
  • Underhill, R. (1976). Turkish Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Uygun, D. (2009). A Split Model for Category Specification: Lexical Categories in Turkish. Ph.D Dissertation, Boğaziçi University.
  • van Schaaik, G. (1996). Studies in Turkish Grammar. Turcologica 28. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • van Schaaik, G. (2002). The Noun in Turkish. Its Argument Structure and the Compounding Straitjacket. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
  • Vikner, C. and Jensen, P.A. (2002). A semantic analysis of the English genitive. Interaction of lexical and formal semantics. Stud. Linguist. 56, 191-- 226.
  • Yükseker, H. (1987). Turkish Nominal Compounds, in P. Avery & H. Yükseker (eds.), Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 7. Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto. 83-102.
  • Yükseker, H. (1994). Possessive Constructions in Turkish, in L. Johanson (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 458-477.
  • Yükseker, H. (1998). Turkish Possessive Compounds, in G. Booij, A. Ralli, S. Scalise (eds.), Proceedings of the First Mediterranean Conference on Morphology, Greece: University of Patras. 153-164.

Karaçay-Malkar Bileşik Sözcük Oluşumu: -sI belirtici için sonuçlar

Year 2017, Volume: 28 Issue: 2, 21 - 41, 29.12.2017

Aslı Gürer

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.301460

Abstract

Bu makale Karaçay-Malkar dilinde özellikle Ad-Ad bileşik sözcüklerinin, ki bu sözcükler -sI belirticisi ile veya -sI belirticisiz ortaya çıkarlar, biçimbilimsel, sesbilimsel, anlambilimsel ve sözdizimsel özelliklerini inceler. Makale aynı zamanda Türkçe bileşik sözcük oluşumu için de aydınlatıcıdır. Öztürk ve Taylan (2006) ile aynı doğrultuda -sI belirticisinin Karaçay-Malkar dilinde nP bağdaştırmasının başı olarak katılan varlığını işaret ettiğini savunuyoruz. Bununla birlikte Karaçay-Malkar Türkçeden daha sınırlayıcıdır çünkü -sI belirtici sadece özü itibariyle geçişli sözcüklere eklenir. Bu makalede aynı zamanda genitif-ilgi yapılarında -sI belirticisinin işlevini de sorguluyoruz. Karaçay-Malkar ve Türkçe bileşik sözcüklere dayanarak -sI belirticisinin hem bileşik sözcüklerde hem de genitif-iyelik yapılarında katılanı getiren yapı olarak görmekle birlikte genitif-iyelik yapılarındaki -sI belirticisinin tıpkı birinci ve ikinci şahıs uyum eklerinde olduğu gibi kişi uyum eki olduğunu savunuyoruz.     

Keywords

Karaçay-Malkar bileşik sözcükler sözcüksel ilişkiler

References

  • Aslan, E. & A. Altan. 2006. The Role of -(s)I in Turkish Indefinite Noun Compounds. Dil Dergisi 131: 57-76.
  • Barker, C. (1995). Possessive Descriptions. CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
  • Boz, E. ve Günay Aktaş, S. (2016). Diasporada Karaçay Türkçesinin kullanımı Eskişehir örneği. Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, 5(1), 145-155.
  • Bozşahin, C.( 2002). The Combinatory Morphemic Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 28: 145-186.
  • Çağatay, S. (2012). Karaçayca birkaç metin. Ankara Dil Tarih ve Coğrafya Dergisi, 277-300.
  • Dede, M. (1978). A Syntactic and Semantic Analysis of Turkish Nominal Compounds. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Michigan.
  • Göksel, A. (2009). Compounds in Turkish. Lingue e Linguaggio 2: 213-236.
  • Göksel, A. and Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London-New York: Routledge.
  • Göksel, A. & Haznedar, B. (2008). Türkçe tamlamaların yapısı: Bir veri tabanı çalışması [The structure of Turkish compounds: A database study]. In Y. Aksan & M. Aksan (Eds.), XXI. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri [Proceedings of the 21st Conference on Linguistics]. Mersin: Mersin University Publications. (pp. 362-364)
  • Hayasi, T. (1996). The Dual Status of Possessive Compounds in Modern Turkish, in Á. Berta, B. Brendemoen, & C. Schönig (eds.) Symbolae Turcologicae 6. Uppsala: Swedish Research Institute in Istanbul. 119-129.
  • Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish Grammar. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Kharytonava, O. (2010). Turkish Noun Compounds in Distributed Morphology. Paper presented at the Banff Workshop on Nominal Dependents. May 8-9, Banff.
  • Kharytonava, O. (2011). Noms Composés en Turc et Morphème -(s)I. Ph.D Dissertation, The University of Western Ontario.
  • Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish Grammar. London: Routledge.
  • Kunduracı, A. (2013). Turkish Noun-Noun Compounds: A Process-based Paradigmatic Account. Ph.D Dissertation, University of Calgary.
  • Öztürk, B. and Taylan, E. E. (2016). Possessive constructions in Turkish. Lingua 182, 88-108.
  • Partee, B. (1983/1997). Uniformity vs. versatility: The genitive, a case study. Appendix to Theo Janssen (1997), compositionality. In: van Benthem, J., ter Meulen, A. (Eds.), The Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier, New York, pp. 464--470.
  • Partee, B. and Borschev, V. (2003). Genitives, relational nouns, and argument--modifier ambiguity. In: Lang, E., Maienborn, C., Fabricius-Hansen, C. (Eds.), Modifying Adjuncts. Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 67--112.
  • Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The Generative Lexicon. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
  • Schroeder, C. (1999). The Turkish Nominal Phrase in Spoken Discourse. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Seegmiller, S. (1996). Karachay. Lincolm.
  • Siewierska, A. (2008). Person forms. In: Song, J.J. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  • Spencer, A. (1991). Morphological Theory. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Swift, L. (1963). A Reference Grammar of Modern Turkish. Bloomington: Indiana University.
  • Tavkul, U. (2004). Modern Karaçay-Malkar Edebiyatının Doğuşu ve Gelişmesi (Sürgün Yıllarından Günümüze Kadar). Kırım Dergisi, 13 (49), 32-36.
  • Tavkul, U. (2007). Karaçay-Malkar Türkçesi. In Ercilasun A. B. (Ed.), Türk Lehçeleri Grameri. Ankara: Akçağ Yayınları.
  • Tokyürek, H. and Pekacar, Ç. (2014). Eski Türkçeden günümüze eksiz ad tamlaması meselesi. Dil Araştırmaları (15), 9-38.
  • Underhill, R. (1976). Turkish Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Uygun, D. (2009). A Split Model for Category Specification: Lexical Categories in Turkish. Ph.D Dissertation, Boğaziçi University.
  • van Schaaik, G. (1996). Studies in Turkish Grammar. Turcologica 28. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • van Schaaik, G. (2002). The Noun in Turkish. Its Argument Structure and the Compounding Straitjacket. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
  • Vikner, C. and Jensen, P.A. (2002). A semantic analysis of the English genitive. Interaction of lexical and formal semantics. Stud. Linguist. 56, 191-- 226.
  • Yükseker, H. (1987). Turkish Nominal Compounds, in P. Avery & H. Yükseker (eds.), Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 7. Department of Linguistics, University of Toronto. 83-102.
  • Yükseker, H. (1994). Possessive Constructions in Turkish, in L. Johanson (ed.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 458-477.
  • Yükseker, H. (1998). Turkish Possessive Compounds, in G. Booij, A. Ralli, S. Scalise (eds.), Proceedings of the First Mediterranean Conference on Morphology, Greece: University of Patras. 153-164.
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Aslı Gürer

Publication Date December 29, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017 Volume: 28 Issue: 2

Cite

APA Gürer, A. (2017). Karaçay-Malkar Bileşik Sözcük Oluşumu: -sI belirtici için sonuçlar. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 28(2), 21-41. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.301460

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) International License.


Journal DOI: 10.18492/dad