Türkçede Parçalı Yanıtlar ve Olumsuz Uyum

Year 2025, Volume: 19 Issue: 36, 47 - 67, 12.05.2025

Emrah Görgülü

https://doi.org/10.54316/dilarastirmalari.1563525

Abstract

Bu makale, olumsuz uyum ifadelerinin (bundan böyle OUİ'ler) Türkçedeki olumsuz sorulara parçalı yanıtlar olarak yorumlanması ile ilgilidir. Türkçenin katı bir olumsuz uyum dili olduğu bilinmektedir; bununla birlikte, yapılan bir değerlendirme testi Türkçede OUİ'lerin çeşitli soru tiplerinde parçalı yanıtlar olarak davranışlarının beklenmedik olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Parçalı yanıtlardaki OUİ'ler yalnızca olumsuz uyum okuması göstermektedirler ve bu yönden diğer katı olumsuz uyum dillerindeki benzerleriyle farklı özellik sergilemektedirler. Yani, birden fazla olumsuzlamanın birbirini iptal ettiği çift olumsuzlama yorumu, Türkçedeki parçalı yanıtlarda hemen hemen hiç mevcut değildir. Bu nedenle, çifte olumsuzlama okumasına yol açan örtük bir olumsuzlama işleyicisi içeren bir açıklamayı ortaya atmak Türkçede mümkün değildir. Bunun yerine, bu açık okumayı açıklamak için, OUİ’lerin tümcesel olumsuzlama yoluyla yerel olarak lisanslandığı bir analiz önerilmektedir. Araştırmadan çıkan bulgular, olumsuz uyum dilleri arasında olumsuz uyum ifadelerinin parçalı yanıtlar olarak yorumlanmasında tipolojik bir ayrım olduğunu işaret etmektedir.

Keywords

Parçalı yanıt , olumsuz soru , olumsuz uyum , çift olumsuzluk , yerellik , Türkçe

Fragment Answers and Negative Concord in Turkish

Abstract

This article is concerned with the interpretation of negative concord items (NCIs henceforth) as fragment answers to negative questions in Turkish. Turkish is known as a strict negative concord language; however, a judgment test showed that the behavior of NCIs as fragment answers in negative questions is rather unexpected. NCIs as fragments do not pattern with their counterparts in other strict negative concord languages since they only display the negative concord reading. The double negation reading in which each instance of negation is interpreted is almost never available. Therefore, an analysis that includes a covert negative operator in order to explain an otherwise double negation reading is not possible in Turkish. Instead, to account for this unambiguous reading I argue for an analysis in which fragment NCIs are locally licensed by sentential negation. The findings reveal a typological distinction among negative concord languages in terms of NCI licensing as well as their interpretation.

Keywords

Fragment answers , negative question , negative concord , double negation , locality , Turkish

References

• BESTEN, Hans den (1986). Double Negation and the Genesis of Afrikaans. Substrata versus Universals in Creole Languages (Eds. Pieter Muysken-Norval Smith). Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 185-230.
• BOŠKOVIĆ, Željko (2009). Licensing negative constituents and negative concord. Proceedings of North East Linguistic Society 38 (Eds. Anisa Schardi-Martin Walkow-Muhammad Abdurrahman). Amherst: University of Massachusetts. 125-139.
• CHOMSKY, Noam (2001). Derivation by phase. Ken Hale: A life in language. (Ed. Michael Kenstowicz), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1-52.
• CORBLIN, Francis; DÉPREZ, Vivane; SWART, Henriëtte de; TOVENA, Lucia (2004). Negative Concord. Handbook of French Semantics, 19 (Eds. Francis Corblin-Henriëtte de Swart). Stanford: CSLI Publications, 417-452.
• ESPINAL, Maria Teresa; PRIETO, Pilar (2011). Intonational encoding of double negation in Catalan. Journal of Pragmatics, 43: 2392-2410.
• ESPINAL, Maria Teresa; TUBAU, Susagna (2016). Interpreting argumental n-words as answers to negative wh-questions. Lingua, 177: 41-59.
• ESPINAL, Maria Teresa; TUBAU, Susagna; BORRÀS-COMES, Joan; PRIETO, Pilar (2016). Double negation in Catalan and Spanish: Interaction between Syntax and prosody. Negation and Polarity: cognitive and experimental perspectives. (Eds. Pierre Larrivée-Chungmin Lee), Berlin: Springer, 145-176.
• FĂLĂUŞ, Anamaria; NICOLAE, Andreea Cristina (2016). Fragment answers and double negation in strict negative concord languages. Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT 26). (Eds. Mary Moroney-Carol-Rose Little-Jacob Collard-Dan Burgdor). University of Texas at Austin, 584-600.
• GIANNAKIDOU, Anastasia (1998). Polarity sensitivity as (Non)veridical Dependency. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• GIANNAKIDOU, Anastasia (2000). Negative…concord. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 18: 457-523.
• GIANNAKIDOU, Anastasia (2006). N-Words and Negative Concord. The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, (Eds. Martin Everaert - Henk van Riemsdijk). Malden, MA, 327-391.
• GIANNAKIDOU, Anastasia; ZEIJLSTRA, Hedde (2017). The landscape of negative dependencies: negative concord and n-words. The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax, (2nd edition). (Eds. Martin Everaert-Henk van Riemsdijk). London: Blackwell, 3940-3977.
• GÖRGÜLÜ, Emrah. (2018). Negative polarity, scope of negation and negative phrases in Turkish. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 14(4), 136-149.
• GRAČANIN-YÜKSEK, Martina (2023). Negation That Isn’t. Languages, 8: 1-26.
• HIRAIWA, Ken (2001). Multiple agree and the defective intervention constraint in Japanese. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 40. (Eds. Ora Matushansky-Albert Costa-Javier Martin-Gonzalez-Lance Nathan-Adam Szczegielniak). Massachusetts: MIT, 67-80.
• İNCE, Atakan (2009). Dimensions of Ellipsis: Investigations in Turkish. University of Maryland doctoral dissertation.
• İNCE, Atakan (2012). Fragment answers and islands. Syntax, 15(2), 181-214.
• JERETIČ, Paloma (2018). Hybrid and Optional Concord in Turkish: A Unified Analysis. IULC Working Papers, 18/2. (Eds. Yılmaz Köylü and Jaklin Kornfilt). Indiana: Indiana University, 1-28.
• JERETIČ, Paloma (2022). Exceptionally Optional Negative Concord with neither…nor. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 1147-1200.
• KAMALİ, Beste (2017). Negative concord in Turkish polar questions. Paper presented in Com(parative) Syn(tax) Meetings. Leiden University Center for Linguistics. March 23, 2017.
• KAYABAŞI, Demet; ÖZGEN, Murat (2018). A Phase-based Account of NPI-Licensing in Turkish. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 54/1: 83-113.
• KORNFILT, Jaklin (1997). Turkish. London and New York: Routledge.
• LAKA, Itziar (1990). Negation is Syntax: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections. Doctoral Dissertation. Massachusetts: MIT.
• MERCHANT, Jason (2001). The Syntax of Silence: Sluicing, Islands and the Theory of Ellipsis. (Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• MIYAGAWA, Shigeru; NISHIOKA, Nobuaki; ZEIJLSTRA, Hedde (2016). Negative sensitive items and the discourse- configurational nature of Japanese. Glossa. A journal of general linguistics, 1/1 33: 1-28.
• PROGOVAC, Liliane (1994). Negative and positive polarity: A binding approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• QUER, Joseph (1993). The Licensing of Negative Items. MA Thesis. Autonomous University of Barcelona.
• SWART, Henriëtte de (2010). Expression and Interpretation of Negation: An OT Typology. (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, Vol. 77). London: Springer Dordrecht.
• ŞENER, Serkan (2007). Cyclic NCI movement. Proceedings of the thirty-fourth Western Conference on Linguistics, 17. (Eds. Erin Bainbridge-Brian Agyabani). Fresno: California State University, 407-417.
• WEIR, Andrew (2015). Fragment answers and exceptional movement under ellipsis: A PF-movement account. Proceedings of the North East Linguistics Society (NELS) 45. (Eds. Thuy Bui-Deniz Özyıldız). Massachusetts: MIT, 175-188.
• ZEIJLSTRA, Hedde (2004). Sentential negation and negative concord. Utrecht LOT Publications: University of Amsterdam doctoral dissertation.
• ZEIJLSTRA, Hedde (2008). Negative concord is syntactic agreement. Ms. Amsterdam.