Türkçe Kim-Ne Sorularında Kapsamlılık Belirticisi Olarak Çoğulluk

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 2021 Sayı: 42, 183 - 194, 29.12.2021

Emrah Görgülü

Öz

Bu makale, Türkçedeki kim-ne sorularında kapsamlılık ile ilgilidir. Cevap aranan soru kapsamlı okumanın dilde hangi yollarla sağlandığıdır. Bu soruya cevap olarak, kim-ne sorularında kapsamlı okumaya yol açan öğenin kim-ne sözcüklerindeki çoğul belirticisi –lAr olduğu ortaya koyulmaktadır. Kim-ne sözcüklerine eklenen çoğul belirticisinin cevapta bir kapsamlılık gereksinimi yarattığı için kapsamlılık belirticisi görevi üstlendiği gösterilmektedir. Bu nedenle, kim-ne sorusunda cevapta verilecek kapsamlı bir cevap listesi olduğu öngörüldüğünden, çoğul belirticisi önsayıltılı bir kapsamlılık belirticisi olarak incelenmektedir. Bu çalışmanın bulguları, kim-ne sorularının doğaları gereği kapsamlı olmadığını savunan çalışmalarla uyum göstermektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kapsamlılık, çoğulluk, kim-ne soruları, önsayıltı, Türkçe.

Kaynakça

• Beck, S. and Rullmann, H. (1999). A flexible approach to exhaustivity in questions. Natural Language Semantics, 7, 249-298. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008373224343.
• Boškovič, Z. (2003). On the interpretation of multiple questions. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 1, 1-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/livy.1.03bos.
• Caponigro, I., Pearl, L., Books, N., and Barner, D. (2012). Acquiring the meaning of free relative clauses and plural definite descriptions. Journal of Semantics, 29, 261-293.
• Dong, H. (2008). ‘Dou’ in wh-questions. Manuscript. Cornell University.
• Dong, H. (2009). Issues in the semantics of Mandarin questions. (Doctoral dissertation). Columbia University.
• Fekete, I., Pearl, L., Brooks, N. and Barner, D. (2012). Exhaustivity in single bare wh-questions: a differential analysis. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics, 3(1), 1-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gigl.549.
• Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M. (1982). Semantic analysis of wh-complements. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 175-233. Access: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25001092.
• Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M. (1984). Studies on the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. (Doctoral dissertation). University of Amsterdam.
• Hagstrom, P. A. (1998). Decomposing questions. (Doctoral dissertation). MIT.
• Hamblin, C. L. (1958). Questions. The Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 36, 159-168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00048405885200211.
• Hamblin, C. L. (1973). Questions in Montague English. Foundations of Language, 10, 41-53. DOI: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25000703.
• Hartmann, K. and Zimmermann, M. (2007). Exhaustivity marking in Hausa: A reanalysis of the particle nee/cee. E. Aboh, K. Hartmann and M. Zimmermann (Ed.), Focus strategies in Niger- Congo and Afro-Asiatic: On the interaction of focus and grammar in some African Languages in (pp. 241-263.). De Gruyter.
• Krifka, M. (2001) For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. C. Fery and W. Sternfeld (Ed.), Audiatur vox sapienta: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow in (pp. 284-319.). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
• Miyagawa, S. (2001). The EPP, scrambling and wh-in-situ. M. Kenstowicz (Ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language in (pp. 293-338.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Miyagawa, S. (in preparation). Syntax in the treetops. Manuscript. MIT.
• Reich, I. (1997). Wer will wann wieviel lesen? Eine Untersuchung verschiedener Frage-Antwort-Bedingungen im Deutschen. In Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340: Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen für die Computerlinguistik 89. Stuttgart. u.a.
• Reis, M. (1992). The category of invariant alles in wh-clauses: on syntactic categories vs. quantifying particles in German. In R. Tracy (Ed.), Who Climbs the Grammar Tree? (pp. 465-492.). Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag.
• Van Rooy, R. (2003). Questioning to resolve decision problems. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 727-763. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LING0000004548.98658.8f.
• Van Rooy, R. (2004). Utility of mention-some questions. Research on Language Computation, 2, 401-416. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s1168-004-1975-0.
• Schulz, P. (2015). Comprehension of exhaustive wh-questions. In S. Armon-Lotem, J. de Jongand, N. Meir (Ed.), Methods for assessing multilingual children: disentangling bilingualism from language impairment (pp. 76-94). Multilingual Matters.
• Schulz, P. and Roeper, T. (2011). Acquisition of exhaustivity in wh-questions: A semantic dimension of SLI?, Lingua, 121, 383-407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lin¬gua.2010.10.005.
• Schulz, K. and van Rooy, R. (2006). Pragmatic meaning and non-monotonic reason¬ing: The case of exhaustive interpretation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 29(2), 205-250. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-3760-4.
• Shan, N. and Shan. C. (2004). A logic of interrogation should be internalized in a modal logic for knowledge. In K. Watanabe and R. Young (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourteenth Semantics and Linguistic Theory. Vol. 14. (pp. 197-211.). Ithaca. New York: Cornell University Press.
• Xiang, Y. (2016). Interpreting questions with non-exhaustive answers. (Doctoral dissertation). Harvard University.
• Zimmermann. M. (2007). Quantifying question particles in German: syntactic effects on interpretations. In E. Puig-Waldmüller (Ed.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 11. (pp. 627-641.). Barcelona: University of Pampau Fabra.