Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=hwkFueErzSJnvnMXUGdgwFsYYQYfdp42seTaJaX1ygg&_path=id%3D1599002%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Dtr%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Morphological Structuring of Search Domains in Turkish Embedded Locative Constructions

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 1, 1 - 23, 29.06.2025

Fatih Ünal Bozdağ

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1599002

Öz

This investigation examines the structural mechanisms governing spatial encoding in Turkish nested locative constructions within Langacker’s Cognitive Grammar theoretical framework. The morphological system manifests implicit cognitive operations through the complex interplay of case morphemes, relativization structures, and possessive markers. This analysis comprehensively demonstrates how Turkish grammar instantiates multiple search domains, specificity predication, and reference point chaining while preserving conceptual accessibility. Complex nested constructions exhibit systematic processing frameworks that facilitate both hierarchical and sequential interpretation of spatial relationships. Contrastive analysis with English prepositional patterns comprehensively reveals divergent grammatical mechanisms achieving equivalent communicative functions. The findings significantly deepen the theoretical understanding of the interface between grammatical structuring and spatial conceptualization, demonstrating how morphological transparency renders visible cognitive operations that remain implicit in other linguistic systems. This research contributes insights to the literature by providing a detailed explication of how grammatical systems organize spatial complexity through various structural mechanisms while maintaining cognitive accessibility.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Spatial Conceptualization Nested Locative Structures in Turkish Reference Domain Morphological Transparency Structural Recursion

Etik Beyan

Author Contributions: This research and all stages related to the research were conducted by a single author. Submission statement and verification: This study has not been previously published elsewhere. It is not under review in another journal. Publication of the study has been approved, either implicitly or explicitly, by all authors and the responsible authorities at the university/research center where the study was conducted. If the study is accepted for publication, it will not be published in the same form in another printed or electronic medium in Turkish or any other language without the written permission of the Journal of Linguistic Research. Conflict of Interest Statement: The author declares that there are no financial or academic conflicts of interest between themselves or with other institutions, organizations or individuals that may affect this study. Data Use: No data was used in the study. Ethical Approval/Participant Consent: There is no need for ethical approval in the study. Financial Support: No financial support was received for the study.

Kaynakça

  • Atak, A. (2018). Türkçede uzamsal dilin konumlanış açısından incelenmesi. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Atak, A., & Uzun, G. L. (2019). Uzamsal referans çerçeveleri ve Türkçedeki görünümleri üzerine bir inceleme. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 30(1), 69-101.
  • Ertekin, Ş. N. (2021). An investigation of Turkish static spatial semantics in terms of lexical variety: an eye tracking study. [Master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
  • Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2011). Turkish: An essential grammar. Routledge.
  • Haun, D. B., Rapold, C. J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C. (2011). Plasticity of human spatial cognition: Spatial language and cognition covary across cultures. Cognition, 119(1), 70-80.
  • Herskovits, A. (1986). Language and spatial cognition: an interdisciplinary study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge University Press.
  • Kita, S., & Özyürek, A. (2003). What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal?: Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 16-32.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2000). Grammar and conceptualization (Vol. 14). Walter de Gruyter.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2020). Nested locatives: conceptual basis and theoretical import. Usage-Based Dynamics in Second Language Development, 141.
  • Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Levinson, S., Meira, S., & The Language and Cognition Group. (2003). ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain-Adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language, 485-516.
  • Matlock, T. (2010). Abstract motion is no longer abstract. Language and Cognition, 2(2), 243-260.
  • Moore, K. E. (2014). The spatial language of time: Metaphor, metonymy, and frames of reference. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives, Vol. 2. (pp. 219-257). Psychology Press.
  • Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, volume 1: Concept structuring systems, Vol. 1. MIT press.
  • Talmy, L. (2003). The representation of spatial structure in spoken and signed language. In Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages (pp. 179-206). Psychology Press.
  • Turker, E. (2003). Locative expressions in Korean and Turkish: A cognitive grammar approach. [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. Hawai University.
  • Van Riemsdijk, H., & Huybregts, R. (2002). 2007. Location and locality. Progress in Grammar: Articles at the 20th Anniversary of the Comparison of Grammatical Models Group in Tilburg, edited by Marc. Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation. In honor of Joseph E. Emonds, (pp. 339-364). Roccade.

Türkçe İçyerleşik Konumlanış Kurulumlarındaki Arama Alanlarının Biçimbilimsel Yapılanması

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 36 Sayı: 1, 1 - 23, 29.06.2025

Fatih Ünal Bozdağ

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1599002

Öz

Bu araştırma, Langacker’ın Bilişsel Dilbilgisi kuramsal çerçevesinde, Türkçedeki içyerleşik yerlem yapılardaki uzamsal kodlamanın yapısal düzeneklerini incelemektedir. Biçimbilimsel dizge, durum biçimbirimleri, ilgi yapıları ve iyelik belirticilerinin çok katmanlı etkileşimi yoluyla örtük bilişsel işlemleri dizgesel bir biçimde yansıtmaktadır. Bu ayrıntılı çözümleme, Türkçe dilbilgisinin kavramsal erişilebilirliği korurken çoklu arama alanlarını, belirtik yüklemleme ve gönderim noktası zincirlenmesini nasıl örneklendirdiğini kapsamlı bir biçimde ortaya koymaktadır. Karmaşık içyerleşik yapılar, uzamsal ilişkilerin hem hiyerarşik hem de ardışık yorumlanmasını kolaylaştıran dizgesel işlem çerçeveleri sergilemektedir. İngilizce ilgeç örüntüleriyle gerçekleştirilen karşıtsal çözümleme, eşdeğer iletişimsel işlevlere ulaşan farklı dilbilgisel düzenekleri bütüncül biçimde açığa çıkarmaktadır. Bulgular, dilbilgisel yapılanma ile uzamsal kavramsallaştırma arasındaki arayüzün kuramsal kavrayışını önemli ölçüde derinleştirip, biçimbilimsel saydamlığın diğer dil dizgelerinde örtük kalan bilişsel işlemleri nasıl görünür kıldığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu çalışma, dilbilgisel dizgelerin uzamsal karmaşıklığı çeşitli yapısal düzenekler aracılığıyla nasıl düzenlediğini ve bilişsel erişilebilirliği nasıl koruduğunu ayrıntılı bir biçimde açıklayarak alanyazına özgün katkılar sunmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Uzamsal Kavramsallaştırma İçyerleşik Konumlanış Kurulumlar Gönderim Alanı Biçimbilimsel Saydamlık Yapısal Özyineleme

Kaynakça

  • Atak, A. (2018). Türkçede uzamsal dilin konumlanış açısından incelenmesi. [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
  • Atak, A., & Uzun, G. L. (2019). Uzamsal referans çerçeveleri ve Türkçedeki görünümleri üzerine bir inceleme. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 30(1), 69-101.
  • Ertekin, Ş. N. (2021). An investigation of Turkish static spatial semantics in terms of lexical variety: an eye tracking study. [Master’s thesis]. Middle East Technical University.
  • Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2011). Turkish: An essential grammar. Routledge.
  • Haun, D. B., Rapold, C. J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C. (2011). Plasticity of human spatial cognition: Spatial language and cognition covary across cultures. Cognition, 119(1), 70-80.
  • Herskovits, A. (1986). Language and spatial cognition: an interdisciplinary study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge University Press.
  • Kita, S., & Özyürek, A. (2003). What does cross-linguistic variation in semantic coordination of speech and gesture reveal?: Evidence for an interface representation of spatial thinking and speaking. Journal of Memory and Language, 48(1), 16-32.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2000). Grammar and conceptualization (Vol. 14). Walter de Gruyter.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press.
  • Langacker, R. W. (2020). Nested locatives: conceptual basis and theoretical import. Usage-Based Dynamics in Second Language Development, 141.
  • Levinson, S. C. (2003). Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Levinson, S. C., & Wilkins, D. P. (2006). Grammars of space: Explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge University Press.
  • Levinson, S., Meira, S., & The Language and Cognition Group. (2003). ‘Natural concepts’ in the spatial topological domain-Adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language, 485-516.
  • Matlock, T. (2010). Abstract motion is no longer abstract. Language and Cognition, 2(2), 243-260.
  • Moore, K. E. (2014). The spatial language of time: Metaphor, metonymy, and frames of reference. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Slobin, D. I. (2004). The many ways to search for a frog: Linguistic typology and the expression of motion events. In Relating events in narrative: Typological and contextual perspectives, Vol. 2. (pp. 219-257). Psychology Press.
  • Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, volume 1: Concept structuring systems, Vol. 1. MIT press.
  • Talmy, L. (2003). The representation of spatial structure in spoken and signed language. In Perspectives on classifier constructions in sign languages (pp. 179-206). Psychology Press.
  • Turker, E. (2003). Locative expressions in Korean and Turkish: A cognitive grammar approach. [Unpublished PhD dissertation]. Hawai University.
  • Van Riemsdijk, H., & Huybregts, R. (2002). 2007. Location and locality. Progress in Grammar: Articles at the 20th Anniversary of the Comparison of Grammatical Models Group in Tilburg, edited by Marc. Phrasal and Clausal Architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation. In honor of Joseph E. Emonds, (pp. 339-364). Roccade.
Toplam 20 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Konular Bilişsel Dilbilimi
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Fatih Ünal Bozdağ 0000-0002-9959-4704

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Haziran 2025
Gönderilme Tarihi 10 Aralık 2024
Kabul Tarihi 3 Mart 2025
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2025 Cilt: 36 Sayı: 1

Kaynak Göster

APA Bozdağ, F. Ü. (2025). Morphological Structuring of Search Domains in Turkish Embedded Locative Constructions. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 36(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1599002

88x31.png

Bu eser


Dergi DOI:10.18492/dad