How do we say NO in Turkish?: A corpus-based analysis of hayır and cık in Turkish

Year 2013, Volume: 10 Issue: 2, 53 - 73, 14.11.2013

Betül Bal-gezegin

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the use of two pragmatic markers in Turkish language: hayır and cık. Hayır is a word meaning no, whereas cık stands as a representation of a sound uttered with the intention of saying no. These two markers, which can be traditionally accepted as no in English, are analyzed in terms of their distributions and pragmatic functions as pragmatic markers. To examine these markers recordings of naturally occurring conversations among people whose L1 is Turkish are obtained from Spoken Turkish Corpus (STC). The results show that there are similarities and differences in the use of hayır and cık in terms of their syntactic properties and pragmatic functions.

 

Keywords: Pragmatic markers, Turkish, hayır, cık, Pragmatic function, Spoken Turkish Corpus (STC)

Keywords

Edimbilimsel belirleyici, Türkçe, hayır, cık, Edimbilimsel işlev, Sözlü Türkçe Derlemi (STD)

References

• Aijmer, K. (2002). English discourse particles. Evidence from a corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Aijmer, K. & Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. (2004). A model and a methodology for the study of pragmatic markers: The semantic field of expectation. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1781-1805.
• André, V. (2005). Oui-non: Une pratique discursive sous influence. Marges Linguistiques, 9, 195-213.
• Arndt, W. (1960). Modal particles in Russian and German. Word, 16, 323–336.
• Baker, P. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. London: Continuum.
• Bazzanella, C. (1990). Phatic connective as interactional cues in contemporary spoken Italian. Journal of Pragmatics, 14, 629-647.
• Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic constraints on relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Brinton, L. J. (1996). Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Burridge, K. & Florey, M. (2002). ‘Yeah-no He’s a Good Kid’: A discourse analysis of Yeah-no in Australian English. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 22, 149-171. Büyükkantarcıoğlu, N. (2006). An analysis of Turkish interjections in the context of reactive idea framing. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Dergisi, 23 (1), 19Crystal, D. (1988). Another look at well, you know … English Today 13, 47-49.
• Çubukçu, H. (2005). Karşılıklı konuşmada destekleyici geri bildirim. XVIII. Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri, (pp. 289-304). Ankara.
• Drummond, K. & Hopper, R. (1993). Some uses of yeah. Research on Language and Social Interaction 26, 203–212.
• Feng, G. (2006). A theory of conventional implicature and pragmatic markers in Chinese. Unpublished PhD Thesis, The University of Reading.
• Fischer, K. (2000). Discourse particles, turn-taking, and the semantics-pragmatics interface. Revue de Sémantique et Pragmatique, 8, 111-137.
• Fraser, B. (1996). Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics, 6 (2), 167-90.
• Fraser, B. (1999). What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 931-952.
• Fuller, J. M. (2003). The influence of speaker roles on discourse marker use. Journal of Pragmatics, 35, 23-45.
• Gülich, E. (1970). Makrosyntax der Gliederungssignale im gesprochenen Französisch. München.
• Horn, L. (1985). Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language, 61, 121-17
• Jefferson, G., (1984). Notes on a systematic deployment of the acknowledgement tokens ‘yeah’ and ‘mmhm’. Papers in Linguistics, 17, 197-216.
• Lee-Goldman, R. (2011). No as a discourse marker. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2627-2649.
• Li, C. N. & S. A. Thompson. (1981). Mandarin Chinese. A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Müller, S. (2005). Discourse markers in native and non-Native English discourse. Amstordam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Norrick, N. R. (2012). Interjections. In G. Anderson & K. Aijmer (Eds.), Pragmatics of society. Handbooks of pragmatics, Vol. 5 (pp. 243-291). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Östman, J-O. (1995). Pragmatic particles twenty years after. In B. Wårvik et al. (Eds.), Proceedings from the Turku conference, Anglicana Turkuensia, 14, 95-10
• Özbek, N. (2000). Yani, işte, şey, ya: Interactional markers of Turkish. In: A. Göksel & Kerslake, C. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics (pp. 393-401). Wiesbaden, Harrosowitz.
• Redeker, G. 199 Review article: Linguistic markers of discourse structure. Linguistics, 29, 1139-1172.
• Risselada, R. & Spooren, W. (1998). Introduction: Discourse markers and coherence relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 131-133.
• Ruhi, Ş. (2011, October). Sözlüksel ve edimbilimsel anlamı sözlü derlemden izlemek. Paper presented at Doğan Aksan Çalıştayı, 3 October 2011.
• Ruhi, Ş., Eryılmaz, K. & Acar, M. G. C. (2012, May). A platform for creating multimodal and multilingual spoken corpora for Turkic languages: Insights from the Spoken Turkish Corpus. Paper presented at the First Workshop on Language Resources and Technologies for Turkic Languages, LREC 2012, İstanbul, 57-63. Retrieved from http://www.lrec-conf.org/ proceedings/ lrec2012/workshops/02. Turkic%20Languages%20Proceedings.pdf
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E.A. & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation, Language, 50, 696-735.
• Schegloff, E. A. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1295-1345.
• Schegloff, E. A. (2001). Getting serious: Joke! serious ‘no’. Journal of Pragmatics 33, 1945–1955.
• Schiffrin, D. (1987). Discourse markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Schourop, L. 1999. Tutorial. Discourse markers. Lingua, 107, 227-265.
• Sperber, Dan & Deirdre, W. 1986. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Spoken Turkish Corpus http//stc.org.tr Travis, C. E. (2006). The natural semantic metalanguage approach to discourse particles. In K. Fischer (Ed.), Approaches to discourse particles, (pp. 219-241). Oxford: Elsevier.
• Wang, Y.F., TSai, P.h., Ling, M.y. (2007). From informational to emotive use: meiyou (‘no’) as a discourse marker in Taiwan Mandarin conversation. Discourse Studies, 9 (5), 677-701.
• Yadugiri, M.A. (1986). Some pragmatic implications of the use of yes and no in response to yes-no questions. Journal of Pragmatics, 10, 199-210.
• Yılmaz, E. (2004). A pragmatic analysis of Turkish discourse Particles: Yani, işte and şey (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). METU, Ankara.
• Yu, A. J.-Y. (2004). Discourse functions of negative meiyou in Taiwan Mandarin. Unpublished MA thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.