Araştırma Makalesi
Yıl 2018,
Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1 - Türk İşaret Dili (TİD) Özel Sayısı (Konuk Editör: A. Sumru Özsoy), 1 - 28, 02.07.2018
Öz
Türk
İşaret Dili’nde (TİD) 127 bileşik sözcüğün yapısını, ulamsal başın konumu ve anlamsal
başın varlığı açısından inceledik. Olası dil etkileşimi etkenlerini elemek için
yalnızca TİD’de iki kökten oluşup Türkçe karşılığı tek kök olan kavramları
incelemeye aldık. Bulgular: (i) İçbaşlı bileşiklerin çoğunluğunun başı sonda;
(ii) Dışbaşlı bileşiklerde baş ilk sırada; (iii) Anlamsal ulam sırayı
etkilemekte. Ayrıca bağımlı köklerden oluşan ve ‘açıklayıcı’ (descriptive)
adını verdiğimiz iki tür bileşik sözcük tanımladık. Baş değiştirgeninin bileşik
sözcük ve öbek yapılarında benzerliğini bulguladık.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Ariel, M. (1991). The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar. Journal of Pragmatics, 16(5), 443-463.
- Bauer, A. (2014). The use of signing space in a shared sign language of Australia. Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Lancaster: Ishara Press.
- Battison, R. M. (1978). Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
- Bisetto, A., & Scalise, S. (2005). The classification of compounds. Lingue e linguaggio, 4(2), 319-332.
- Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford University Press.
- Brennan, M. (1990). Word Formation in British Sign Language. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.
- Dikyuva, H., Zeshan, U. (2008). Türk İşaret Dili - Birinci seviye [Turkish Sign Language - Level One]. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
- Di Sciullo, A. M., & Williams, E. (1987). On the definition of word(Vol. 14). Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
- Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., Collins, P., & Blair, D. (1996). An Introduction to Language. 3rd edition. Sydney: Harcourt Brace.
- Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Göksel, A. (2015). Phrasal compounds in Turkish; Distinguishing citations from quotations. To be published in C. Trips & J. Kornfilt (Eds.), Phrasal Compounds, Special Issue - STUF Language Typology and Universals. (pp. 359-394).
- Göksel, A., & Taşçı, S. S. (2016). Türk İşaret Dili’nde Ödünçlemeler. In E. Arık (Ed.), Ellerle Konuşmak: Türk İşaret Dili Araştırmaları (pp. 361-388). İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
- Johnston, Trevor & Schembri, Adam (1999). On Defining Lexeme in a Signed Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 2(2), 115-185.
- Klima, E., Bellugi, U. (1979). The Signs of Language. MA: Harvard University Press.
- Kubuş, O. (2008). An analysis of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) phonology and morphology. M.S. Thesis. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
- Libben (2006). ‗Why study compound processing? An overview of the issues,‘ in G. Libben and G. Jarema (eds.) The representation and processing of compound words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-22.
- Liddell, S. K. (1984). THINK and BELIEVE: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language, 60, 372-399.
- Liddell, S. K., & Johnson, R. E. (1986). American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization and phonological remnants. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4(4), 445-513.
- Meir, I. (2012). Word classes and word formation. In R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, B. Woll (Eds.) Sign Language: An International Handbook. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 77-112.
- Meir, I., Aronoff, M., Sandler, W., & Padden, C. (2010). Sign languages and compounding. Compounding. John Benjamins, 573-595.
- Özsoy, A. S., Nuhbalaoğlu, D. (2014). Linearization in Noun Phrases in Turkish Sign Language. Formal and Experimental Approches in Sign Languages, University of Venice. 9-11 June 2014.
- Özyürek, A., İlkbaşaran, D., Arık, E. (2004). Türk İşaret Dili [Turkish Sign Language]. Koç University.
- Scalise, S., Bisetto, A. (2009). The classification of compounds. In The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, ed. Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer, 34-53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sevinç (2006). Grammatical Relations and Word Order in Turkish Sign Language TİD. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
- Supalla, S. J. (1990). The arbitrary name sign system in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 67(1), 99-126.
- Taşçı, S. S. (2012). Phonological and morphological aspects of lexicalized fingerspelling in Turkish Sign Language (TID). Master's Thesis. Bogazici University, Istanbul.
- Taşçı, S. S., Göksel, A. (2014). The morphological categorization of polymorphemic lexemes: A study based on lexicalized fingerspelled forms in TİD. Dilbilim Araştırmaları. Special Issue in Honor of Prof. A. Sumru Özsoy, 165-180.
- Taşçı, S.S, Göksel, A., & Gökgöz, K. (frth.). (Non-)simultaneity as a predictor for semantics and iconicity in complex lexemes. Ms.
- Türk İşaret Dili Kaynak Sitesi [Turkish Sign Language Resource Page]. Boğaziçi University. 2008-2010.
- Tkachman, O. (2016). Novel compounding in two sign languages: Lexical conventionalization versus structural conventionalization. Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 12. January 4-7, Melbourne, Australia.
- Uyechi, L. (1996). The geometry of visual phonology. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.
- Vercellotti, M. L., & Mortensen, D. R. (2012). A classification of compounds in American Sign Language: an evaluation of the Bisetto and Scalise framework. Morphology, 22(4), 545-579.
Yıl 2018,
Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1 - Türk İşaret Dili (TİD) Özel Sayısı (Konuk Editör: A. Sumru Özsoy), 1 - 28, 02.07.2018
Öz
This
paper investigates the position of the structural head and its connection to
the semantic head in 127 compounds in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). To eliminate
language contact effects, we selected compounds that have monomorphemic
counterparts in Turkish. The findings are: (i) Endocentric compounds tend to be
head-final, (ii) Exocentric compounds tend to be head-initial, (iii) compound
internal order, in some well-defined cases, is affected by the lexical
semantics of one of the components. In addition, we identify two classes of
compounds, cranberry compounds and descriptive compounds, and finally, point to
the similarities between compound and phrase structure with respect to the head
parameter.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynakça
- Ariel, M. (1991). The function of accessibility in a theory of grammar. Journal of Pragmatics, 16(5), 443-463.
- Bauer, A. (2014). The use of signing space in a shared sign language of Australia. Boston/Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, Lancaster: Ishara Press.
- Battison, R. M. (1978). Lexical borrowing in American Sign Language. Silver Spring, MD: Linstok Press.
- Bisetto, A., & Scalise, S. (2005). The classification of compounds. Lingue e linguaggio, 4(2), 319-332.
- Booij, G. (2010). Construction Morphology. Oxford University Press.
- Brennan, M. (1990). Word Formation in British Sign Language. Stockholm: University of Stockholm.
- Dikyuva, H., Zeshan, U. (2008). Türk İşaret Dili - Birinci seviye [Turkish Sign Language - Level One]. Nijmegen: Ishara Press.
- Di Sciullo, A. M., & Williams, E. (1987). On the definition of word(Vol. 14). Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
- Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., Collins, P., & Blair, D. (1996). An Introduction to Language. 3rd edition. Sydney: Harcourt Brace.
- Givón, T. (1983). Topic continuity in discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
- Göksel, A. (2015). Phrasal compounds in Turkish; Distinguishing citations from quotations. To be published in C. Trips & J. Kornfilt (Eds.), Phrasal Compounds, Special Issue - STUF Language Typology and Universals. (pp. 359-394).
- Göksel, A., & Taşçı, S. S. (2016). Türk İşaret Dili’nde Ödünçlemeler. In E. Arık (Ed.), Ellerle Konuşmak: Türk İşaret Dili Araştırmaları (pp. 361-388). İstanbul: Koç Üniversitesi Yayınları.
- Johnston, Trevor & Schembri, Adam (1999). On Defining Lexeme in a Signed Language. Sign Language and Linguistics 2(2), 115-185.
- Klima, E., Bellugi, U. (1979). The Signs of Language. MA: Harvard University Press.
- Kubuş, O. (2008). An analysis of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) phonology and morphology. M.S. Thesis. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
- Libben (2006). ‗Why study compound processing? An overview of the issues,‘ in G. Libben and G. Jarema (eds.) The representation and processing of compound words. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1-22.
- Liddell, S. K. (1984). THINK and BELIEVE: Sequentiality in American Sign Language. Language, 60, 372-399.
- Liddell, S. K., & Johnson, R. E. (1986). American Sign Language compound formation processes, lexicalization and phonological remnants. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4(4), 445-513.
- Meir, I. (2012). Word classes and word formation. In R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, B. Woll (Eds.) Sign Language: An International Handbook. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 77-112.
- Meir, I., Aronoff, M., Sandler, W., & Padden, C. (2010). Sign languages and compounding. Compounding. John Benjamins, 573-595.
- Özsoy, A. S., Nuhbalaoğlu, D. (2014). Linearization in Noun Phrases in Turkish Sign Language. Formal and Experimental Approches in Sign Languages, University of Venice. 9-11 June 2014.
- Özyürek, A., İlkbaşaran, D., Arık, E. (2004). Türk İşaret Dili [Turkish Sign Language]. Koç University.
- Scalise, S., Bisetto, A. (2009). The classification of compounds. In The Oxford Handbook of Compounding, ed. Rochelle Lieber and Pavol Štekauer, 34-53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Sevinç (2006). Grammatical Relations and Word Order in Turkish Sign Language TİD. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
- Supalla, S. J. (1990). The arbitrary name sign system in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 67(1), 99-126.
- Taşçı, S. S. (2012). Phonological and morphological aspects of lexicalized fingerspelling in Turkish Sign Language (TID). Master's Thesis. Bogazici University, Istanbul.
- Taşçı, S. S., Göksel, A. (2014). The morphological categorization of polymorphemic lexemes: A study based on lexicalized fingerspelled forms in TİD. Dilbilim Araştırmaları. Special Issue in Honor of Prof. A. Sumru Özsoy, 165-180.
- Taşçı, S.S, Göksel, A., & Gökgöz, K. (frth.). (Non-)simultaneity as a predictor for semantics and iconicity in complex lexemes. Ms.
- Türk İşaret Dili Kaynak Sitesi [Turkish Sign Language Resource Page]. Boğaziçi University. 2008-2010.
- Tkachman, O. (2016). Novel compounding in two sign languages: Lexical conventionalization versus structural conventionalization. Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research 12. January 4-7, Melbourne, Australia.
- Uyechi, L. (1996). The geometry of visual phonology. Stanford, California: CSLI Publications.
- Vercellotti, M. L., & Mortensen, D. R. (2012). A classification of compounds in American Sign Language: an evaluation of the Bisetto and Scalise framework. Morphology, 22(4), 545-579.
Toplam 32 adet kaynakça vardır.
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Bölüm | Makaleler |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 2 Temmuz 2018 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2018Cilt: 29 Sayı: 1 - Türk İşaret Dili (TİD) Özel Sayısı (Konuk Editör: A. Sumru Özsoy) |
Cited By
İşaret Dilinin Tarihi Serüveni ve Türk İşaret Dili
Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi
https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.876469
Bu eser
Dergi DOI:10.18492/dad