Türkçede Ad-Ad Bileşiklerinin Sesbilgisel Görünümlerine ilişkin Bürünsel ve Analojik Etkiler

Year 2023, Volume: 40 Issue: 2, 347 - 368, 27.12.2023

İpek Pınar Uzun

https://doi.org/10.32600/huefd.1159241

Abstract

Türkçede bileşiklerin sesbilgisel özellikleri üzerine yapılan bürünsel araştırmalar tipik olarak sözlüksel vurgunun bürünsel tanımlarını incelemiştir, ancak sesbilgisel özelliklere ilişkin bulgular görece daha az sayıdadır. Bu çalışmada, Türkçede bileşik-öbek ile varolan-uydurma bileşiklerin akustik özelliklerini ölçülerek, Türkçede ad-ad bileşiklerindeki sözlüksel vurgunun sesbilgisel görünümleri araştırılmaktadır. Deney 1’de ad-ad bileşikleri ve öbeksel karşıtlıkları ([da.ná.bur.nu] ve [[da.ná][bur.nú]]) kullanılmış, Deney 2’de varolan ve uydurma bileşikler ([da.ná.bur.nu] ve [ke.dí.bur.nu]) akustik olarak ölçülmüştür. Bulgular, Deney 1 için bileşikleri öbeksel karşıtlarından ayıran belirgin bir sesbilgisel eğilim göstermiştir. Model yoğunluk, süre, perde değerleri, konum (sol ve sağ) ve bürünsel tür (bileşik ve öbek) arasında güçlü bir etkileşim ortaya koymuştur. Deney 2’de uydurma bileşikler dilin sözlüksel bir parçası olmamasına karşın, uydurma bileşiklerden elde edilen bulgular, varolan bileşiklerin perde, yoğunluk ve sürelerinin varolan bileşiklere benzer vurgu atamasını taşıdığını ortaya koymuştur. Konum (sol ve sağ) ve sözcük türü (varolan ve uydurma) etkenlerinin akustik özelliklerine ilişkin benzer etkileşim etkileri gözlenmiştir. Elde edilen bulgular, Türkçede bileşik vurgusunun sesbilgisel görünümlerinin ortaya konulmasına katkı sağlayabilmekte ve ileri araştırmalara zemin hazırlamaktadır.

Keywords

bileşik, öbek, sözlüksel, uydurma, akustik, vurgu

Project Number

TÜBİTAK BİDEB-2219

Prosodic and Analogical Effects in Phonetic Realization in Turkish Noun-Noun Compounds

Abstract

Previous studies on phonetic realization of compounds in Turkish have typically examined prosodic accounts of lexical stress; however, evidence for phonetic features is relatively sparse. This study investigates phonetic implementation of lexical stress in Turkish noun-noun compounds by measuring acoustic correlates of compounds vs. phrases and existing vs. novel compounds. In Experiment 1, noun-noun compounds and their phrasal contrasts (e.g., [da.ná.bur.nu] ‘mole cricket’ vs. [[da.ná][bur.nú]] ‘nose of a calf’), in Experiment 2, existing and novel compounds were acoustically measured by using existing vs. novel pairs (e.g., [da.ná.bur.nu] vs. [ke.dí.bur.nu]). Results for Experiment 1 showed a clear phonetic tendency that distinguished compounds from their phrasal counterparts. The model revealed significant main effects for intensity, duration, pitch values, and a strong interaction between position (left vs. right) and prosodic type (compound vs phrase). In Experiment 2, even though novel compounds are not lexicalized parts of a language, results from novel compounds revealed a similar stress assignment on the pitch, intensity, and duration of existing compounds. Significant interaction effects were observed for acoustic correlates between position (left vs. right) and compound type (existing vs. novel). Findings obtained from this research might contribute to revealing the basic phonetic aspects of the compound stress in Turkish, and results may lay the groundwork for future research.

Keywords

Compound, phrase, existing, novel, phonetics, stress

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK BİDEB-2219

Project Number

TÜBİTAK BİDEB-2219

Thanks

This study was supported by the Tübitak-Bideb 2219 Post-doctoral research fellowship program. I am grateful to Bernd Möbius and Ivan Yuen for their guidance and directive suggestions for the earlier processes of this research at Saarland University Phonetics Group.

References

• Aksan, Y., Aksan, M., Özel, S.A., Yılmazer, H., Bektaş, Y., Mersinli, Ü., Atasoy, G., & Demirhan, U.U. (2017). Turkish National Corpus (TNC). (Version 3.0.63).https://v3.tnc.org.tr
• Arnaud, P.J.L. & Renner, V. (2014). English and French [NN]N lexical units: A categorical, morphological, and semantic comparison. Word Structure, 7(1),1-28.10.3366/word.2014.0054
• Athanasopoulou, A., Vogel, I., & Dolatian, H. (2017). Acoustic properties of canonical and non-canonical stress in French, Turkish, Armenian, and Brazilian Portuguese. In Interspeech (pp.1398-1402).10.21437/Interspeech.2017-1514
• Baayen, R.H. (2008). Analysing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics. Cambridge University Press.
• Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1-48.10.18637/jss.v067.i01
• Beckman, M.E. (1986). Stress and non-stress accents. Foris Publications.
• Bell, M.J. & Plag, I. (2012). Informativeness is a determinant of compound stress in English. Journal of Linguistics, 48(3),485-520.10.1017/S0022226712000199
• Bell, M.J. & Plag, I. (2013). Informativity and analogy in English compound stress. Word Structure, 6(2),129-155.10.3366/WORD.2013.0042
• Berg, T. (2012). The cohesiveness of English and German compounds. The Mental Lexicon, 7(1),1-33.10.1075/ml.7.1.01ber
• Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2022). Praat:doing phonetics by computer [Computer program]. Version 6.2.14, Retrieved 24 May 2022 from http://www.praat.org/
• Charette, M., Göksel, A., & Şener, S. (2007). Initial stress in morphologically complex words in Turkish: The interface of prosodic structure and ‘phrase’ structure Phonological Domains; Universals and Deviations (DGfS-29) Workshop. Siegen University.
• Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968). The sound pattern of English. Harper & Row, Inc.
• Cinque, G. (1993). A null theory of phrase and compound stress. Linguistic Inquiry, 24(2), 239-297. Demircan, Ö. (1975). Türk Dilinde vurgu:Sözcük vurgusu. Türk Dili, 284.
• Farnetani, E. & Torsello, C.T. & Cosi, P. (1988). English compounds versus non-compound noun phrases in discourse: An acoustic and perceptual study. Language and Speech, 31(2), 157-180.
• Fry, D.B. (1958). Experiments in the perception of stress. Language and Speech, 1(2), 126-152.10.1177/002383095800100207
• Gagné, C.L., & Spalding, T.L. (2006). Using conceptual combination research to better understand novel compound words. SKASE Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 3(2), 9-16.
• Giegerich, H. (2009). The English compound stress myth. Word Structure, 2(1), 1-17.10.3366/E1750124509000270
• Giegerich, H.J. (1992). English phonology: An introduction. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139166126
• Giegerich, H.J. (2004). Compound or phrase? English noun-plus-noun constructions and the stress criterion. English Language and Linguistics, 8, 1-24.10.1017/S1360674304001224
• Göksel, A. & Haznedar, B. (2007). Remarks on Compounding in Turkish. MorboComp Project, Bologna University.
• Halle, M. & Vergnaud, J.R. (1987). An essay on stress. Current Studies in Linguistics,15. MIT Press. 10.1017/S0952675700001160
• Harrington, J., Beckman, M.E., Fletcher, J., & Palethorpe, S. (1998). An electropalatographic, kinematic, and acoustic analysis of supralaryngeal correlates of word-level prominence contrasts in English. In Fifth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing.https://www.isca-speech.org/archive/pdfs/icslp_1998/harrington98_icslp.pdf
• Inkelas, S. & Orgun, C.O. (1998). Level (non)ordering in recursive morphology: Evidence from Turkish. In S.G. Lapointe, D.K. Brentari & P.M. Farrell (eds.) Morphology and its relation to phonology and syntax (pp.360-410). CSLI.
• Inkelas, S., & Orgun, C.O. (2003). Turkish stress: a review. Phonology, 20(1), 139-161.
• Johanson, L. (2021). Turkic. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781139016704
• Kabak, B. & Revithiadou, A. (2007). Prosodic structure above the phonological word. Phonological Domains; Universals and Deviations (DGfS-29) Workshop. Siegen University.
• Kabak, B. & Vogel, I. (2001). The phonological word and stress assignment in Turkish. Phonology, 18, 315-260. Cambridge University Press.https://www.jstor.org/stable/4420202
• Kabak, B. & Vogel, I. (2005). Irregular Stress in Turkish. Word-level accentual system of Turkish Project.
• Kamali, B. & İkizoğlu, D. (2012). Against compound stress in Turkish [Conference presentation]. 16th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, Middle East Technical University.
• Kassambara, A. (2020). ‘ggplot2’ based publication ready plots [R package ggpubr version 0.4.0].Retrieved from https://github.com/kassambara/ggpubr/issues
• Konrot, A. (1981). A new phoneme of ‘voiced velar stop erosion’: Phonetic explanation for the phonological status of the so-called ‘soft g’ in Turkish. University of Essex Department of Language and Linguistics Occasional Papers 34, 12-24.
• Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish. Routledge.
• Kunduracı, A. (2013). Turkish noun-noun compounds: A process-based paradigmatic account. [PhD Dissertation]. University of Calgary.
• Kunduracı, A. (2017). Process morphology in concatenation. N. Büyükkantarcıoğlu, E. Yarar, & I. Özyıldırım (Eds), 45. Yıl Yazıları (pp. 255-278). Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınevi.
• Kunduracı, A. (2019). The paradigmatic aspect of compounding and derivation. Journal of Linguistics, 55(3), 1-47. 10.1017/S0022226718000518
• Kunter, G. & Plag, I. (2007). What is compound stress? [Conference presentation]. International Congress of Phonetic Sciences, University of Saarbrücken.
• Kunter, G. (2011). Compound stress in English: The phonetics and phonology of prosodic prominence. Walter de Gruyter.
• Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P.B., & Christensen, R.H.B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26.10.18637/jss.v082.i13
• Ladd, D.R. (1984). English compound stress. In D. Gibbon & H. Richter (Eds.), Intonation, accent, and rhythm: Studies in discourse phonology (pp. 253-267). Walter de Gruyter.
• Ladd, D.R. (1996). Intonational phonology. Cambridge University Press.
• Lees, R. (1961). The phonology of Modern Standard Turkish. Indiana University.
• Lenth, R.V. (2016). Least-Squares Means: The R Package lsmeans. Journal of Statistical Software, 69(1), 1-33.10.18637/jss.v069.i01
• Levi, S.V. (2005). Acoustic correlates of lexical accent in Turkish. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 35(1), 73-97.10.1017/S0025100305001921
• Lewis, G. (1967). Turkish grammar. Oxford University Press.
• Liberman, M. & Prince, A. (1977). On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry, 8(2), 249-336.http://www.jstor.org/stable/4177987
• Morrill, T. (2012). Acoustic correlates of stress in English adjective–noun compounds. Language and speech, 55(2), 167-201.10.1177/0023830911417251
• Neef, M. (2009). IE, Germanic: German. In R. Lieber & P. Štekauer (eds.), The Oxford handbook of compounding (pp.386-399). Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199695720.013.0020
• Nespor, M., & Vogel, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris.10.1017/S0952675700002219
• Nguyên, T.A. & Ingram, J.C.L. (2007). Acoustic and perceptual cues for compound-phrasal in Vietnamese. Journal of Acoustic Society of America, 122(3),1746-1757.10.1121/1.2747169
• Olsen, S. (2000). Compounding and stress in English: A closer look at the boundary between morphology and syntax. Linguistische Berichte, 181, 55-70.
• Öztürk, Ö. (2005). Modeling phoneme durations and fundamental frequency contours in Turkish speech. [PhD Dissertation]. Middle East Technical University.
• Plag, I. & Kunter, G. & Lappe, S. (2007). Testing hypotheses about compound stress assignment in English: A corpus-based investigation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 3(2), 199-232.10.1515/CLLT.2007.012
• Plag, I. & Kunter, G. & Schramm, M. (2011). Acoustic correlates of primary and secondary stress in North American English. Journal of Phonetics, 39(3), 362-374.10.1016/j.wocn.2011.03.004
• Plag, I. & Kunter, G. (2010). Constituent family size and compound stress assignment in English. In S. Olsen (ed.), New impulses in word-formation (Linguistische Berichte, Sonderheft 17), 349-382. Buske.
• Plag, I. (2006). The variability of compound stress in English: Structural, semantic, and analogical factors. English Language and Linguistics, 10(1), 143-172.10.1017/S1360674306001821
• Plag, I. (2009). Word Formation in English. (pp. 44-51). Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in P. Griffiths, A. Bloomer, & A. Merrison (eds.) Introducing Language in Use:A reader. Routledge. 10.4000/lexis.4532
• Plag, I. (2010). Compound stress assignment by analogy: The constituent family bias. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 29, 243-282.10.1515/zfsw.2010.009
• R Core Team. (2022). R:A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/
• Ryan, K. (2005). Grid-maker [Praat script]. Retrieved from http://phonetics.linguistics.ucla.edu/facilities/acoustic/grid-maker.praat
• Schlechtweg, M. (2018). Memorization and the Compound-Phrase Distinction. In Memorization and the Compound-Phrase Distinction. De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110570861
• Schlücker, B. & Plag, I. (2011). Compound or phrase? Analogy in naming. Lingua, 121(9), 1539-1551.10.1016/j.lingua.2011.04.005
• Schlücker, B. (2013). The semantics of lexical modification: Meaning and meaning relations in German A+N compounds. In P. ten Hacken & C. Thomas (eds.), The semantics of word formation and lexicalization (pp. 121-139). Edinburgh University Press.10.3366/edinburgh/9780748689606.001.0001
• Schmerling, S.F. (1971). A stress mess. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 1, 52-66.http://las.sagepub.com/content/56/4/529
• Selkirk, E. (1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. MIT Press.
• Sezer, E. (1983). On non-final stress in Turkish. Journal of Turkish Studies, 5, 61-69.
• Swift, L.B. (1963). A reference grammar of Modern Turkish. Uralic and Altaic series (Vol. 19). Indiana University Publications.
• Van Goethem, K. (2009). Choosing between A+N compounds and lexicalized A+N phrases: The position of French in comparison to Germanic languages. Word Structure, 2(2), 241-253.10.3366/E1750124509000439
• Vogel, I., & Raimy, E. (2002). The acquisition of compound vs. phrasal stress: the role of prosodic constituents. Journal of Child Language, 29(2), 225-250.10.1017/S0305000902005020
• Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2:Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. Springer. ISBN:978-3-319-24277-4,https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org
• Xu, Y. (2013). ProsodyPro—A Tool for Large-scale Systematic Prosody Analysis of continuous prosodic events[Praat script]. Retrieved from http://www.homepages.ucl.ac.uk/~uclyyix/ProsodyPro/