BibTex RIS Cite

Complement Clauses in Tuvan and Their Counterparts in Turkish

Year 2017, Issue: 81, 185 - 203, 01.05.2017

Abstract

The topic of this article is non-finite complement clauses in Tuvan and their counterparts in Turkish. Tuvanian non-finite complement clauses which are formed with participle and infinitive suffixes -GAn, - V r, -vAK link to the main clause as a subordinate clause and function as arguments of matrix clauses subject, direct object and indirect object . In this article, nominal complements are examined synchronically in terms of their morphological properties, syntactic structure and functions, semantic features and tense-aspect functions. Moreover, whether nominal complement clauses are factive and non-factive are dealt with in detail. In this study based on description of Standard Tuvanian and Altay Tuvanian which is considered to be a dialect of Tuvanian, the functions of nominal complement clauses are scrutinized with Modern Turkish in terms of different aspects. Thus, two different Turkic languages are compared with nominal complement clauses

References

  • Anderson, D. S. Gregory (2004). Auxiliary Verb Constructions in Altai-Sayan Turkic. Turcologica 51. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Aydemir, İbrahim Ahmet (2002). “Attributive Nebensätze im Altai-Tuwinischen”. Scholarly Depth and Accuracy. A Festschrift to Lars Johanson. Yay. Nurettin Demir & Fikret Turan Ankara: Grafiker Yay. 39-50. ____ (2009). “Zum Aorist im Altai-Tuwinischen”. Turcological Letters to Bernt Brendemoen. Ed. Éva Á. Csató, Gunvald Ims, Joakim Parslow, Finn Thiesen and Emel Türker. Oslo: Novus Press. 21-29.
  • ____ (2010). Türkçede Zaman ve Görünüş Sistemi. Ankara: Grafiker Yay.
  • Blühdorn, Hadarik (2008). “Subordination and Coordination in Syntax, Semantics and Discourse”. ʻSubordinationʼ versus ʻCoordinationʼ in Sentence and Text. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Ed. C. Fabricius & W. Ramm. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Cristofaro, Sonia (2003). Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Csató, Éva Á. (1999). “Modalität in Türkischen Komplementsätzen und ihre Entsprechungen im Deutschen”. Türkisch und Deutsch im Vergleich. Eds. L. Johanson & J. Rehbein. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 23-32.
  • ____ (2010). “Two Types of Complement Clauses in Turkish”. Turcology in Mainz/Turkologie in Mainz. Ed. Julian Rentzsch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 107-122.
  • Dixon, R. M. W. (2009). “The Semantics of Clause Linking in Typological Perspective”. The Semantics of Clause Linking: A Cross-linguistic Typology. Ed. Alexandra Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1-55.
  • Erkman-Akerson, Fatma & Şeyda Ozil (1998). Türkçede Niteleme. Sıfat İşlevli Yan Tümceler. İstanbul: Simurg.
  • Göksel, Aslı & Celia Kerslake (2005). Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Harrison, K. David (2001). Topics in the Phonology and Morphology of Tuvan. PhD. Dissertation. USA: Yale University.
  • Isxakov, F. G. & A. A. Pal’mbax (1961). Grammatika tuvinskogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija. Moskva.
  • Johanson, Lars (1990). “Studien zur türkeitürkischen Grammatik”. Handbuch der türkischen Sprachwissenschaft 1. Ed. György Hazai. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 146-278.
  • ____ (1991). “Zur Typologie türkischer Gerundialsegmente”. Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları: 98-110.
  • ____ (1992). Strukturelle Faktoren in türkischen Sprachkontakten. Sitzungsberichte der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der J. W. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main 29: 5. Stuttgart: Steiner.
  • ____ (1994). “Türkeitürkische Aspektotempora”. Tense systems in European languages. Eds. R. Thieroff & J. Ballweg. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 247-266.
  • ____ (1998). “The Structure of Turkic”. Eds. Lars Johanson & Éva A. Csató. The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge. 30-66.
  • ____ (2013). “Selection of Subjunctors in Turkic Non-Finite Complement Clauses”. bilig 67: 73-90.
  • Karakoç, Birsel (2002). “Nogayca ve Türkiye Türkçesinde Tümleç Yan Cümlelerinde Yüklemleştiriciler”. Scholarly Depth and Accuracy. A Festschrift to Lars Johanson. Yay. Nurettin Demir & Fikret Turan. Ankara: Grafiker Yay. 193-216.
  • Kerslake, Celia (2007). “Alternative Subordination Strategies in Turkish”. Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse. Eds. Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein and Lukas Pietsch. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 231-258.
  • Lehmann, Cristian (1988). “Towards a Typology of Clause Linkage”. Clause Combining in Discourse and Grammar. Eds. John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson. Albany, N.Y. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 181-225.
  • Ölschlägel, Anett C. (2013). Der Taigageist. Berichte und Geschichten von Menschen und Geistern aus Tuwa. Zeitgenössische Sagen und andere Folkloretexte. Tectum Verlag: Marburg.
  • Rehbein, Jochen [Cristiane Hohenstein, Lukas Pietsch ile birlikte] (2007). “Connectivity as an Object of Linguistic Research in Multilingualism”. Connectivity in Grammar an Discourse. Eds. J. Rehbein & C. Hohenstein & L. Pietsch. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 1-20.
  • Rentzsch, Julian (2013). “Türk Dillerinde Kipsellik ve Kipselliğin Anlambilimsel Haritası”. Bilig 67: 129–168.
  • Schönig, Claus (1998). “South Siberian Turkic”. The Turkic languages. Ed. Lars Johanson & Éva A. Csató. London: Routledge. 403-416.

Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri

Year 2017, Issue: 81, 185 - 203, 01.05.2017

Abstract

Bu makalenin konusunu, Tuvacada bitimsiz ad işlevli yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki eşdeğerlikleri oluş- turmaktadır. Tuvacada belli sıfat-fiil ve isim-fiil ekleriyle -GAn, - V r, -vAK oluşturulan isimleştirmelere dayalı olarak kurulan ad işlevli yancümleler, altasıralı olarak bir üst/temel cümleye bağlanmakta ve bağlı oldukları üst/ temel cümlelerin eyleyenleri özne, doğrudan nesne, dolaylı nesne olarak işlev görmektedirler. Bu makale kapsamında ad işlevli yancümleler, morfolojik özellikleri, sözdizimsel yapıları ve işlevleri, semantik özellikleri ve zaman-görünüş işlevleri gibi açılardan eşzamanlı bakış açısıyla betimlenmektedir. Ayrıca burada, ad işlevli yancümlelerin olgusal olup olmadıkları konusu da detaylıca ele alınmaktadır. Hem Standart Tuvacanın hem de Tuvacanın bir ağzı sayılan Altay Tuvacasının betimlendiği bu çalışmada, Tuvacada ad işlevli yancümlelerin Türkiye Türkçesindeki işlevsel karşılıkları da irdelenmektedir. Böylece iki çok farklı Türk dili, ad işlevli yancümleler bağlamında mukayese edilmiş olmaktadır.

References

  • Anderson, D. S. Gregory (2004). Auxiliary Verb Constructions in Altai-Sayan Turkic. Turcologica 51. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
  • Aydemir, İbrahim Ahmet (2002). “Attributive Nebensätze im Altai-Tuwinischen”. Scholarly Depth and Accuracy. A Festschrift to Lars Johanson. Yay. Nurettin Demir & Fikret Turan Ankara: Grafiker Yay. 39-50. ____ (2009). “Zum Aorist im Altai-Tuwinischen”. Turcological Letters to Bernt Brendemoen. Ed. Éva Á. Csató, Gunvald Ims, Joakim Parslow, Finn Thiesen and Emel Türker. Oslo: Novus Press. 21-29.
  • ____ (2010). Türkçede Zaman ve Görünüş Sistemi. Ankara: Grafiker Yay.
  • Blühdorn, Hadarik (2008). “Subordination and Coordination in Syntax, Semantics and Discourse”. ʻSubordinationʼ versus ʻCoordinationʼ in Sentence and Text. A Cross-linguistic Perspective. Ed. C. Fabricius & W. Ramm. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Cristofaro, Sonia (2003). Subordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Csató, Éva Á. (1999). “Modalität in Türkischen Komplementsätzen und ihre Entsprechungen im Deutschen”. Türkisch und Deutsch im Vergleich. Eds. L. Johanson & J. Rehbein. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 23-32.
  • ____ (2010). “Two Types of Complement Clauses in Turkish”. Turcology in Mainz/Turkologie in Mainz. Ed. Julian Rentzsch. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz. 107-122.
  • Dixon, R. M. W. (2009). “The Semantics of Clause Linking in Typological Perspective”. The Semantics of Clause Linking: A Cross-linguistic Typology. Ed. Alexandra Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1-55.
  • Erkman-Akerson, Fatma & Şeyda Ozil (1998). Türkçede Niteleme. Sıfat İşlevli Yan Tümceler. İstanbul: Simurg.
  • Göksel, Aslı & Celia Kerslake (2005). Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. London and New York: Routledge.
  • Harrison, K. David (2001). Topics in the Phonology and Morphology of Tuvan. PhD. Dissertation. USA: Yale University.
  • Isxakov, F. G. & A. A. Pal’mbax (1961). Grammatika tuvinskogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija. Moskva.
  • Johanson, Lars (1990). “Studien zur türkeitürkischen Grammatik”. Handbuch der türkischen Sprachwissenschaft 1. Ed. György Hazai. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó. 146-278.
  • ____ (1991). “Zur Typologie türkischer Gerundialsegmente”. Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları: 98-110.
  • ____ (1992). Strukturelle Faktoren in türkischen Sprachkontakten. Sitzungsberichte der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der J. W. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main 29: 5. Stuttgart: Steiner.
  • ____ (1994). “Türkeitürkische Aspektotempora”. Tense systems in European languages. Eds. R. Thieroff & J. Ballweg. Tübingen: Niemeyer. 247-266.
  • ____ (1998). “The Structure of Turkic”. Eds. Lars Johanson & Éva A. Csató. The Turkic Languages. London: Routledge. 30-66.
  • ____ (2013). “Selection of Subjunctors in Turkic Non-Finite Complement Clauses”. bilig 67: 73-90.
  • Karakoç, Birsel (2002). “Nogayca ve Türkiye Türkçesinde Tümleç Yan Cümlelerinde Yüklemleştiriciler”. Scholarly Depth and Accuracy. A Festschrift to Lars Johanson. Yay. Nurettin Demir & Fikret Turan. Ankara: Grafiker Yay. 193-216.
  • Kerslake, Celia (2007). “Alternative Subordination Strategies in Turkish”. Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse. Eds. Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein and Lukas Pietsch. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 231-258.
  • Lehmann, Cristian (1988). “Towards a Typology of Clause Linkage”. Clause Combining in Discourse and Grammar. Eds. John Haiman & Sandra A. Thompson. Albany, N.Y. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 181-225.
  • Ölschlägel, Anett C. (2013). Der Taigageist. Berichte und Geschichten von Menschen und Geistern aus Tuwa. Zeitgenössische Sagen und andere Folkloretexte. Tectum Verlag: Marburg.
  • Rehbein, Jochen [Cristiane Hohenstein, Lukas Pietsch ile birlikte] (2007). “Connectivity as an Object of Linguistic Research in Multilingualism”. Connectivity in Grammar an Discourse. Eds. J. Rehbein & C. Hohenstein & L. Pietsch. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. 1-20.
  • Rentzsch, Julian (2013). “Türk Dillerinde Kipsellik ve Kipselliğin Anlambilimsel Haritası”. Bilig 67: 129–168.
  • Schönig, Claus (1998). “South Siberian Turkic”. The Turkic languages. Ed. Lars Johanson & Éva A. Csató. London: Routledge. 403-416.
There are 25 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

İbrahim Ahmet Aydemir This is me

Publication Date May 1, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017 Issue: 81

Cite

APA Aydemir, İ. A. (2017). Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri. Bilig(81), 185-203.
AMA Aydemir İA. Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri. Bilig. May 2017;(81):185-203.
Chicago Aydemir, İbrahim Ahmet. “Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler Ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri”. Bilig, no. 81 (May 2017): 185-203.
EndNote Aydemir İA (May 1, 2017) Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri. Bilig 81 185–203.
IEEE İ. A. Aydemir, “Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri”, Bilig, no. 81, pp. 185–203, May 2017.
ISNAD Aydemir, İbrahim Ahmet. “Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler Ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri”. Bilig 81 (May 2017), 185-203.
JAMA Aydemir İA. Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri. Bilig. 2017;:185–203.
MLA Aydemir, İbrahim Ahmet. “Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler Ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri”. Bilig, no. 81, 2017, pp. 185-03.
Vancouver Aydemir İA. Tuvacada Ad İşlevli Yancümleler ve Türkiye Türkçesindeki Eşdeğerlikleri. Bilig. 2017(81):185-203.

Ahmet Yesevi University Board of Trustees