TÜRK İŞARET DİLİNDE GÖNDERİMSELLİK VE İŞARET ALANI

Yıl 2020, , 9 - 27, 07.02.2020

Bahtiyar Makaroğlu

https://doi.org/10.33690/dilder.651015

Öz

Görsel-uzamsal modaliteye özgü farklılıkları ve
sözdizim-anlambilim arakesitini bir araya getirerek bu çalışma, Türk İşaret Dilindeki
(TİD) işaret alanının gönderimsel amaçlarla kullanılmasına odaklanmaktadır. TİD
verisine dayanarak, kimlik uzayı ve eksiltili uzay (işaretçinin önündeki
sınırlı alan)  arasındaki belirgin
ayrımdan yola çıkarak işaret alanının kullanımının anlambilimsel çözümlenmesine
ilişkin genel bir bakış sunmaktadır. TİD’de eksiltili alan hem gönderimsel
(örn. söylem gösterimi) hem de gönderim-dışı birimler (örn. belirteç
öbeklerindeki göstermeler) ile ilişkili olabilmektedir. Costello (2016)’yı
takip eden çalışma, adın kendisi ve “gönderimsel çıkak” olarak adlandırılan
uzamsal konum arasındaki ilişkiye yoğunlaşarak anlamsal gönderimsellikte
[+kimlik] ϕ-özelliğinin
özel rolünü tartışmaktadır. Ayrıca, TİD’de kimlik ϕ-özelliğinin AÖ’yü yöneten işlevsel bir
başta yer aldığı öne sürülmektedir. Uzayın eşbiçimli haritanmasındaki çok
belirgin benzerliklere rağmen, işaret dillerindeki gönderimsellik olgusunu
çözümlemek için daha fazla karşılaştırmalı dilbilgisel veriyi dikkate almak
gerçekten önemlidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İşaret alanı, Gönderimsellik, Belirleyici öbeği, Kimlik, Türk İşaret Dili

Kaynakça

• Abner, N. (2012). There once was a verb: The predicative core of possessive and nominalization structure in American Sign Language. PhD Dissertation. University of California at Los Angeles.
• Abney, S. P. (1987). The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Doktora Tezi. MIT.
• Aronoff, M., Meir, I., & Sandler, W. (2000). Universal and particular aspects of sign language morphology. In K. Grohmann & C. Struijke (eds.), University of Maryland working papers in linguistics, 10, 1-33.
• Bahan, B. (1996). Non-manual realization of agreement in American Sign Language. PhD Dissertation. Boston University.
• Bahan, B., Kegl, K., MacLaughlin, D., & Neidle, C. (1995). Convergent evidence for the structure of determiner phrases in American Sign Language. In: L. Gabriele, D. Hardison & R. Westmoreland (eds.), FLSM VI: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Mid-America, 1–12. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
• Baker, M. C. (2003). Lexical categories: Verbs, nouns and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Barberà, A. G. (2012). The meaning of space in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Reference, specificity and structure in signed discourse. PhD. Dissertation. Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
• Berenz, N. (1996). Person and deixis in Brazilian Sign Language. PhD. Dissertation. University of Calfornia, Berkeley.
• Bertone, C. (2009). The syntax of noun modification in Italian Sign language (LIS). University of Venice Working Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 19.
• Bertone, C. (2007). La struttura del sintagma determinante nella Lingua dei Segni Italiana (LIS). PhD. Dissertation. Università Ca’ Foscari, Venice.
• Bhat, D. N. S. (2004). Pronouns. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bošković, Ž. (2005). On the locality of left branch extraction and the structure of NP. Studia Linguistica, 59 (1), 1-45.
• Branchini, C. (2014). On relativization and clefting: An analysis of Italian Sign Language. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Brunelli, M. (2011). Antisymmetry and sign languages (LOT Dissertation Series 284). Utrecht: LOT Publications.
• Carlson, G. (1977). Reference to kinds in English. PhD. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
• Chierchia, G. (1998). Reference to kinds across language. Natural Language Semantics, 6 (4), 339-405.
• Crisma, P. (1997). L’articolo nella prosa inglese antica e la teoria degli articoli nulli. PhD. Dissertation. Università di Padova.
• Clark, H. H. (1975). Bridging. In: Proceedings of the 1975 Workshop on Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing (pp.169-74). Association for Computational Linguistics.
• Cormier, K. (2012). Pronouns. In: R. Pfau, M. Steinbach & B. Woll (eds.), Sign language: An International Handbook (pp. 227-244). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Costello, B. D. N. (2016). Language and modality: Effects of the use of space in the agreement system of Lengua De Signos Espanola (Spanish Sign Language). Utrecht: LOT.
• Danon, G. (2011). Agreement and DP-internal feature distribution. Syntax, 14, 297-317.
• De Vriendt, S., & Rasquinet, M. (1989) The expression of genericity in sign language. In: S. Prillwitz & T. Vollhaber (eds.), Current Trends in European Sign Language Research: Proceedings of the 3rd European Congress on Sign Language Research (pp. 249-255). Hamburg: Signum.
• Dikyuva, H., Makaroğlu, B., & Arık, E. (2015). Türk İşaret Dili Dilbilgisi Kitabı. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı Yayınları: Ankara.
• Emeksiz, Z. E. (2003). Özgüllük ve Belirlilik. Doktora Tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Emmorey, K., & Tversky, B. (2002). Spatial perspective choice in ASL. Sign Language and Linguistics, 5(1), 3-26.
• Engberg-Pedersen, E. (1993). Space in Danish Sign Language. The semantics and morphosyntax of the use of space in a visual language. Hamburg: Signum-Verlag.
• Fauconnier, G. (1985). Mental Spaces. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
• Friedman, L. (1975). Space and time reference in American Sign Language. Language, 51, 940-961.
• Geach, P. (1962). Reference and Generality. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
• Gupta, A. (1980). The Logic of Common Nouns. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press.
• Hawkins, J. A. (1978). Definiteness and Indefiniteness. London: Croom Helm.
• Heim, I. (1982). The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. PhD. Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
• Hoffmeister, R. (1977). The influential point. In: W. Stokoe (ed.), Proceedings of the National Symposium on Sign Language Research and Teaching (pp.177-191). Silver Spring, MD: National Association of the Deaf.
• Janis, W. D. (1992). Morphosyntax of the ASL verb phrase. PhD Dissertation. State University of New York at Buffalo.
• Karabüklü, S. (2018). Strategies to Express Time in a Tenseless Language: Turkish Sign Language (TİD). Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 29 (1) , 87-118.
• Kegl, J. (1977). ASL syntax: Research in progress and proposed research. Unpublished Manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
• Klima, E. & Bellugi, U. (1979). The Signs of Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Lacy, R. (1974/2003). Putting some of the syntax back into the semantics. Sign Language and Linguistics 6(2), 211-244.
• Landau, I. (2016). DP-internal semantic agreement: A configurational analysis. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 34, 975-1020.
• Liddell, S. (2003). Grammar, Gesture and Meaning in American Sign Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Liddell, S. (1990). Four functions of a locus: Reexamining the structure of space in ASL. In: C. Lucas (ed.) Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues (pp.176-198). Washington D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
• Lillo-Martin, D., & Meier, M. (2011). On the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics, 37(3/4), 95-141.
• Lillo-Martin, D. & Klima, E. (1990). Pointing out differences. In: S. D. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), ASL Pronouns in Syntactic Theory (pp. 191–210).
• Longobardi, G. (1994). Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry, 25 (4), 609-665.
• MacLaughlin, D. (1997). The structure of determiner phrases: Evidence from American Sign Language. PhD Dissertation. Boston University, Boston, MA.
• Makaroğlu, B. (2018). Türk İşaret Dilinde Uyum: Şablon Biçimbilim Açısından Bir İnceleme. Doktora tezi. Ankara Üniversitesi.
• Meier, R. (2012). Language and Modality. In: Pfau, Roland, Markus Steinbach, and Bencie Woll (eds.). Sign Language: An International Handbook, pp. 574-601. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Meier, R. (1990). Person deixis in American Sign Language. In: S. Fischer & P. Siple (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Sign Language Research, Vol. 1: Linguistics (pp. 175-190). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Neidle, C., Kegl, J., MacLaughlin, D., Bahan, B. & Lee, R. G. (2000). The Syntax of American Sign Language. Functional Categories and Hierarchical Structure. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Pereltsvaig, A. (2007). The universality of DP: A View from Russian. Studia Linguistica, 61(1), 59-94.
• Pfau, R. (2011). A point well taken: On the typology and diachrony of pointing. In: D. J. Napoli & G. Mathur (eds.), Deaf around the world. The impact of language (pp.144-163). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Poizner, H., Klima, E. S., & Bellugi, U. (1987). What the Hands Reveal about the Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Prince, E. (1981). Towards a taxonomy of given-new information. In: P. Cole (Ed.), Radical Pragmatics (pp. 223-256). NY: Academic Press.
• Quer, J. (2011). Quantificational strategies across language modalities. In: M. Aloni, F. Roelofsen, G. W. Sassoon, K. Schulz, V. Kimmelman & M. Westera (eds.), Proceedings of 18th Amsterdam Colloquium. University of Amsterdam.
• Quer, J. (2005). Quantifying Across Language Modalities: Generalized Tripartite Structures in Signed Languages. Presentation at the I Workshop on Sign Languages, EHU Vitoria-Gasteiz.
• Quer, J., Rondoni, E.M., Barberà, G., Frigola, S., Iglesias, P., Boronat, J., Martínez, M., Aliaga, D., & Gil, J. (2005). Gramàtica bàsica LSC. CD-ROM. Barcelona: Federació de persones sordes de Catalunya.
• Rappaport, G. (2013). Determiner phrases and mixed agreement in Slavic. In: L. Schürcks, A. Giannakidou & U. Etxeberria (eds.), The Nominal Structure in Slavic and Beyond (pp. 343-90). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
• Rinfret J. (2009). L'Association Spatiale du Nom en Langue des Signes Québécoise: Formes, Fonctions et Sens. PhD Dissertation. Université du Québec à Montréal.
• Ritter, E. (1995). On the syntactic category of pronouns and agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13, 405-443.
• Strawson, P. F. (1959). Individuals. London: Methuen.
• Wilbur, R. B. (2008). Complex predicates involving events, time and aspect: Is this why sign languages look so similar?. In: J. Quer (ed.) Signs of the Time. Selected papers from TISLR 8. Hamburg: Signum Verlag.
• Wilbur, R. B. (1979). American Sign Language and Sign systems: Research and Application. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
• Winston, E. A. (1995). Spatial mapping in comparative discourse frames. In: K. Emmorey & J. S. Reilly (eds.), Language, Gesture, and Space (pp. 87-114). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Zimmer, J. & Patschke, C. (1990). A class of determiners in ASL. In: C. Lucas (ed.), Sign Language Research: Theoretical Issues (pp. 201-210). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.