Abstract
Katkısız eylemlerle kurulmuş yapılar (örn., birisine yanıt vermek), sözdizimsel olarak çift geçişli (örn., birisine keman vermek) yapılara benzemektedir; ancak, bu yapıların tematik yapıları bakımından benzer olup olmadıkları tartışma konusudur. Katkısız eylemlerin anlamlandırılma süreçlerinde Türkçe konuşan yetişkinlerin, bu ifadelerin tematik yapısını nasıl kurduklarını ve olayı kaç tematik ögeden oluşan bir olay olarak tahayyül ettiklerini ortaya koymak amacıyla anadili Türkçe olan katılımcılara bir değerlendirme çalışması uygulanmıştır. Bu çalışmada, katılımcılar kendilerine verilen farklı sayıda ögesi olan ifadeleri okumuş ve her bir ifadede kaç eleman olduğuna karar vermişledir. Çalışmadaki tüm kritik ifadelerde vermek katkısız eylemi farklı bir ad öbeği (örn., yanıt vermek ve görev vermek) ile birlikte kullanılmıştır. Bu ad öbeklerinin iki farklı biçimbirimle (-IA ve -lAn+dIr) eylemleştirilmiş versiyonları (örn., yanıtlamak ve görevlendirmek) karşılaştırmak amacıyla kullanılmıştır. Sonuç olarak, katkısız eylemlerin birlikte kullanıldıkları ad öbekleriyle birlikte olay yapısının anlamlandırılmasına katkı sunduğu ve bu yapıların eylemleştirilmiş versiyonlarındaki biçimbirimlerin bu anlam bileşenini yansıttığı bulgulanmıştır.
References
- Bruening, B. (2016). Light verbs are just regular verbs. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 22(1), 7.
- Brugman , C. (2001). Light verbs and polysemy. Language Sciences, 23(4-5), 551-578.
- Butt, Miriam. 2010. “The Light Verb Jungle: Still Hacking Away”. In Complex Predicates in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Mengistu Amberber, Mark Harvey and Brett Baker (eds), 48-78. Cambridge University Press.
- Culicover, Peter, and Jackendoff, Ray. 2005. Simpler Syntax. Oxford University Press.
- Hale, K. L., & Keyser, S. J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53-100. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Jackendoff, R. (1974). A deep structure projection rule. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 481-505.
- Jackendoff, R. (1997). The Architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language. Oxford University Press.
- Uçar, A. (2010). Light verb constructions in Turkish dictionaries: Are they sub-meanings of polysemous verbs. Mersin Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 7, 1-1.
- Uçar, A., & Kurtoğlu, Ö. (2012). A corpus-based account of polysemy in Turkish: the case of the verb ver-'give'. Studia Uralo-altaica, 49, 539-551.
- Wittenberg, E., & Snedeker, J. (2011). Syntactic priming across constructions: Light verbs. In Poster, AMLaP Conference, Paris.
- Wittenberg, E., & Snedeker, J. (2014). It takes two to kiss, but does it take three to give a kiss? Categorization based on thematic roles. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(5), 635-641.
- Wittenberg, E., Jackendoff, R., Kuperberg, G., Paczynski, M., Snedeker, J., & Wiese, H. (2014). The processing and representation of light verb constructions. Structuring the argument, 61-80.
Abstract
Light verb constructions (e.g., give a kiss to somebody) syntactically reflect typical ditransitive structures (e.g., give a violin to somebody) yet it is not clear whether these two structures thematically similar as well. We tested Turkish-speaking adults on their construal of light verb constructions with respect to the number of thematic roles they perceive in the event structure in a rating study. The light verb give with a different noun phrase was used in all critical utterances (e.g., give a response or give an assignment). The noun phrases of these constructions denominalized either by -lA or -lAn+dIr morpheme (e.g., response-lA and assignment-lAn+dIr) were also used as control items. The study concluded that the light verbs with their noun phrase complements contribute to the semantic construal of the event structure and the thematic role assignment processes for the denominalized versions of these structures reflect this meaning construal.
References
- Bruening, B. (2016). Light verbs are just regular verbs. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 22(1), 7.
- Brugman , C. (2001). Light verbs and polysemy. Language Sciences, 23(4-5), 551-578.
- Butt, Miriam. 2010. “The Light Verb Jungle: Still Hacking Away”. In Complex Predicates in Cross-Linguistic Perspective, Mengistu Amberber, Mark Harvey and Brett Baker (eds), 48-78. Cambridge University Press.
- Culicover, Peter, and Jackendoff, Ray. 2005. Simpler Syntax. Oxford University Press.
- Hale, K. L., & Keyser, S. J. (1993). On argument structure and the lexical expression of syntactic relations. The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, 53-100. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Jackendoff, R. (1974). A deep structure projection rule. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 481-505.
- Jackendoff, R. (1997). The Architecture of the language faculty. Cambridge: MIT Press.
- Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language. Oxford University Press.
- Uçar, A. (2010). Light verb constructions in Turkish dictionaries: Are they sub-meanings of polysemous verbs. Mersin Üniversitesi Dil ve Edebiyat Dergisi, Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 7, 1-1.
- Uçar, A., & Kurtoğlu, Ö. (2012). A corpus-based account of polysemy in Turkish: the case of the verb ver-'give'. Studia Uralo-altaica, 49, 539-551.
- Wittenberg, E., & Snedeker, J. (2011). Syntactic priming across constructions: Light verbs. In Poster, AMLaP Conference, Paris.
- Wittenberg, E., & Snedeker, J. (2014). It takes two to kiss, but does it take three to give a kiss? Categorization based on thematic roles. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(5), 635-641.
- Wittenberg, E., Jackendoff, R., Kuperberg, G., Paczynski, M., Snedeker, J., & Wiese, H. (2014). The processing and representation of light verb constructions. Structuring the argument, 61-80.
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Language Studies |
| Journal Section | Research Articles |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | June 30, 2022 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2022 |
Bu eser
Dergi DOI:10.18492/dad