Research Article

The interpretation of overt subject pronominals in Turkish

Volume: 34 Number: 2 December 29, 2023
TR EN

The interpretation of overt subject pronominals in Turkish

Abstract

This study explores the interpretation of co-indexation between overt subject pronominals, specifically o and kendisi, with quantified/wh-word antecedents among native Turkish speakers. The research employs a task designed to elicit responses that either force a bound or disjoint interpretation within biased contexts. The findings reveal that o and kendisi are not interchangeable within the same context. A closer examination unveils that the interpretation of o is governed by certain syntactic constraints, although target-deviant interpretations are observed. In contrast, kendisi is more likely to be interpreted as a bound pronoun, even though both bound and disjoint interpretations are syntactically accessible. This shows that the constraint governing the binding of overt subject pronominals to quantified/wh-word antecedents, known as the Overt Pronoun Constraint, is operative for o but not for kendisi. The distinction in the behavior of these pronominals can be attributed to the diffrences in their syntactic configurations: o is costly configured than kendisi, hence displaying asymmetry across quantified/wh-word antecedents. Since the binding relations of kendisi is similar to pro, it is more prone to binding by the matrix subject.

Keywords

References

  1. Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (2002). Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 14, 151-170.
  2. Bautista, C. A. (2014a). Weak crossover and the syntax-phonology interface. In Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 40, 1-19.
  3. Bautista, C. A. (2014b). Weak Crossover is not a semantic phenomena. In L. Crnic and U. Sauerland (Eds.), The Art and Craft of Semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim (Vol. 1). (pp. 31–60). MITWPL70.
  4. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Foris Publications.
  5. Çınar, O. & Çakır, S. (2019). The universality of the overt pronoun constraint: The re-analysis of the Turkish case. Australian Journal of Linguistics, (39)4, 463-484.
  6. Enç, M. (1986). Topic switching and pronominal subjects in Turkish. In D. I. Slobin & K. Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 195-208). John Benjamins.
  7. Erguvanlı-Taylan, E. (1986). Pronominal versus zero representation of anaphora in Turkish. In D. I. Slobin & K. Zimmer (Eds.), Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 209-231). John Benjamins.
  8. Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. Routledge.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Linguistics

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

December 29, 2023

Submission Date

May 3, 2023

Acceptance Date

November 8, 2023

Published in Issue

Year 2023 Volume: 34 Number: 2

APA
Çınar, O. (2023). The interpretation of overt subject pronominals in Turkish. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 34(2), 165-200. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1292056