Usage-based Approach in Language Contacts

Yıl 2023, Sayı: 38/Özel Sayı, 97 - 112, 07.07.2023

Hasan Güzel

https://doi.org/10.20427/turkiyat.1268975

Öz

Linguistic patterns show variation in different contexts of use. One of the important reasons for language variation is language contacts. Linguistic variation emerges as a result of language users’ contact with other language users in different times and environments. Offering a relatively new theoretical perspective, this approach offers new opportunities to explain phenomena such as language acquisition and language change. This approach, which became visible in linguistics towards the end of the 20th century, assumes, as its name suggests, a close relationship between linguistic structures and use. It looks more to evidence from usage to understand the cognitive organization of language. Although usage has been treated from a cognitive perspective in some studies, in recent studies, the ontological status of the language system is not seen as exclusively cognitive in character, and usage is treated from both cognition- and communication-centered aspects. In this study, after introducing the basic concepts of the approach, the studies conducted from this perspective are evaluated and the contributions of the usage-based approach to the study of Turkish language relations are emphasized.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Usage-based approach, language contacts, cognitive, communicative, use.

DİL İLİŞKİLERİNDE KULLANIM TEMELLİ YAKLAŞIM

Öz

Dilsel örüntüler farklı kullanım ortamlarında çeşitlenme gösterirler. Dillerin çeşitlenme göstermesinin önemli nedenlerinden biri dil ilişkileridir. Dil kullanıcılarının farklı zaman ve ortamlarda öteki dil kullanıcılarıyla yaptıkları temasın sonucunda dilsel çeşitlenmeler ortaya çıkar. Bu durum dil ilişkileri disiplininde birçok çalışmada ele alınmasına rağmen dilsel yapıları kullanım temelli yaklaşımlar ile açıklama girişimleri yok denecek kadar azdır. İlk olarak Üretici Dilbilim ve Bilişsel dilbilim arasındaki metodolojik bir karşıtlığı vurgulamak için kullanılan Kullanım Temelli Yaklaşım, dili sosyal ve bilişsel bir insan davranışı olarak alır ve bu bağlamda açıklamalar arar. Nispeten yeni bir teorik bakış açısı sunan bu yaklaşım, dil edinimi ve dil değişimi gibi fenomenlerin açıklanmasında yeni fırsatlar sunar. Genel anlamda 20. yüzyılın sonlarına doğru dilbilimde görünür hale gelen bu yaklaşım, adından da anlaşılacağı üzere dilsel yapılar ile kullanım arasında yakın bir ilişki olduğunu varsayar. Dilin bilişsel organizasyonunun anlaşılması için daha çok kullanımdan elde edilen kanıtlara bakar. Her ne kadar kullanım, yapılan bazı çalışmalarda bilişsel bakış açısı ile ele alınsa da son çalışmalarda dil sisteminin ontolojik statüsü karakter olarak yalnızca bilişsel olarak görülmemekte kullanım hem biliş hem de iletişim merkezli yönleriyle ele alınmaktadır. Çalışmada, yaklaşımın temel kavramları tanıtıldıktan sonra bu bakış açısıyla yapılmış araştırmalar değerlendirilmekte, kullanım temelli yaklaşımın Türkçe dil ilişkileri çalışmalarına sunacağı katkılar üzerinde durulmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

kullanım temelli yaklaşım, dil ilişkileri, bilişsel, iletişimsel, kullanım.

Kaynakça

• Akkuş, M. (2017). Doğu Anadolu Bölgesi Ağızları ve Azerbaycan Türkçesi Ağızlarında Altsıralama Yapılarının Alansal Yayılımı Üzerine Kullanım Tabanlı Dil Bilimsel Bir Değerlendirme. V. Uluslararası Türkiye Türkçesi Ağız Araştırmaları Çalıştayı Bildirileri içinde (ss. 77-99). Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları.
• Akkuş, M. (2019). A Usage-Based Investigation of Converbial Constructions in Heritage Speakers’ Turkish Living in the Netherlands (Basılmamış Doktora Tezi). METU. Ankara.
• Auer, P. ve Pfänder, S. (2011). Constructions: Emergent or Emerging?. P. Auer ve S. Pfänder (Ed.), Constructions: Emerging and Emergent içinde (ss. 1-21). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
• Backus, A. (1996). Two in One: Bilingual Speech of Turkish Immigrants in the Netherlands. Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
• Backus, A. (2014). A Usage-based Approach to Borrowability. E. Zenner ve G. Kristiansen (Ed.), New Perspectives on Lexical Borrowing: Onomasiological, methodological and phraseological innovations içinde (ss. 19-39). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.
• Backus, A. (2015a). A Usage-based Approach to Code-switching: The Need for Reconciling Structure and Function. G. Stell ve K. Yakpo (Ed.), Code-switching Between Structural and Sociolinguistic Perspectives içinde (ss. 19-38). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.
• Backus, A. (2015b). Rethinking Weinreich, Labov & Herzog from a Usage-based Perspective: Contact- induced Change in Dutch Turkish. Taal en Tongval: Tijdschrift voor Taalvariatie, 67(2), 275-306.
• Backus, A. (2020). Usage-based Approaches. E. Adamou ve Y. Matras (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language Contact içinde (ss. 110-126). Milton Park, Abingdon, England, New York: Routledge.
• Behrens, H. (2009). Usage-based and Emergentist Approaches to Language Acquisition. Linguistics, 47, 383- 411.
• Benmamoun, E., Montrul, S. ve Polinsky, M. (2013). Heritage Languages and Their Speakers: Opportunities and Challenges for Linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 39, 129-181.
• Bulut, C. (1998). Copied Strategies of Clause Combining. Turkic Languages, 2, 171-197.
• Bybee, J. (2006). From Usage to Grammar: The Mind’s Response to Repetition. Language, 82, 711-733.
• Bybee, J. L. (2007). Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Bybee, J. L. (2010). Language, Usage and Cognition. Cambridge, England, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Bybee, J. ve Beckner, C. (2010). Usage Based Theory. Heine, B., H. Narrog. The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis içinde (ss. 827-855). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Bybee, J. ve Scheibman, J. (1999). The Effect of Usage on Degrees of Constituency: The Reduction of don’t in English. Linguistics, 37, 575-596.
• Bybee, J. ve Thompson, S. (2000). Three Frequency Effects in Syntax. Berkeley Linguistics Society, 23, 65-85.
• Coussé, E. ve von Mengden, F. (2014). The Role of Change in Usage-based Conceptions of Language. E.
• Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change içinde (ss. 1-19). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Croft, W. (2000). Explaining Language Change. An Evolutionary Approach. London: Longman.
• Croft, W. (2007). Construction Grammar. D. Geeraerts ve H. Cuyckens (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics içinde (ss. 463-508). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Csató, É. Á. (2005). On Copying in Kashkay. É. Á. Csató, B. Isaksson ve C. Jahani, (Ed.), Linguistic Convergence and Areal Diffusion. Case Studies from Iranian, Semitic and Turkic içinde (ss. 271-283). London: Routledge Curzon.
• Csató, É. Á. (2006). Copying Word Order Properties. H. Boeschoten ve L. Johanson (Ed.), Turkic Languages in Contact (Turcologica 61) içinde (ss. 152-157). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
• De Smet, H. (2014). Does Innovation Need Reanalysis?. E. Coussé, ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change içinde (ss. 23-48). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Diessel, H. (2017). Usage-based Linguistics. M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics içinde (ss. 1-26). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Diessel, H. (2019). The Grammar Network: How Linguistic Structure is Shaped By Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Doğruöz, A. S. ve Backus, A. (2009). Innovative Constructions in Dutch Turkish: An Assessment of Ongoing Contact-induced Change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12(1), 41-63.
• Ellis, N. C. (2002). Frequency Effects in Language Processing. SSLA, 24, 143-188
• Fischer, O. (2007). Morphosyntactic Change: Functional and Formal Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fischer, O. (2008). On Analogy as the Motivation for Grammaticalization. Studies in Language, 32, 336-382.
• Fischer, O. (2011). Grammaticalization as Analogically Driven Change?. H. Narrog ve B. Heine (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization içinde (ss. 31-42). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: Chicago University Press
• Güzel, H. (2021). Dil İlişkileri Bağlamında Halaçça (Basılmamış Doktora Tezi). Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Türkiyat Araştırmaları Enstitüsü. Ankara.
• Hakimov, N. (2016). Effects of Frequency and Word Repetition on Switch-placement: Evidence from Russian- German Code-mixing. J.A. Robinson and M. Reif (Ed.), Culture and Cognition in Bilingualism içinde (ss. 91- 125). Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter.
• Hakimov, N. (2021). Explaining Russian-German Code-mixing: A Usage-based Approach to Code-mixing. Berlin: Language Science Press.
• Hayase, N. (2014). The Motivation for Using English Suspended Dangling Participles: A Usage-based Development of (Inter) Subjectivity. E. Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Contact içinde (ss. 117-146). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Heine, B. ve Kuteva, T. (2003). On Contact-induced Grammaticalization. Studies in Language, 27(3), 529-572.
• Heltoft, L. (2014). Constructional Change, Paradigmatic Structure and the Orientation of Usage Processes. E. Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change içinde (ss. 203-241). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Johanson, L. (1992). Strukturelle Faktoren in Türkischen Sprachkontakten (Sitzungsberichte der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der J. W. Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, 29:5). Stuttgart: Steiner.
• Johanson, L. (2021). Turkic. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press.
• Kemmer, S. ve Barlow, M. (2000). Introduction: A Usage-Based Conception of Language. M. Barlow ve S.
• Kemmer (Ed.), Usage-Based Models of Language içinde (ss. i-xxvii). Stanford: CSLI.
• Kıral, F. (2001). Das gesprochene Aserbaidschanisch von Iran. Eine Studie zu den syntaktischen Einflüssen des Persischen (Turcologica 43). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
• Kragh, K. J. ve Schøsler, L. (2014). Reanalysis and Gramma(ticaliza)tion of Constructions: The Case of the Deictic Relative Construction with Perception Verbs in French. E. Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.). Usage- Based Approaches to Language Contact içinde (ss. 169-202). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Langacker, R. (1987). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Langacker, R. (1988). A Usage-based Model. B. Rudzka-Ostyn (Ed.), Topics in Cognitive Linguistics içinde (ss. 121-161). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.
• Langacker, R. (1991). Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 2: Descriptive Application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Langacker, R. (2000). A Dynamic Usage-based Model. M. Barlow ve S. Kemmer (Ed.), Usage Based Models of Language içinde (ss. 1-63). Stanford: CSLI.
• Matras, Y. (2009). Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Nørgård-Sørensen, J. (2014). Filling Empty Distinctions of Expression with Content: Usage-motivated Assignment of Grammatical Meaning. E. Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Contact içinde (243-270). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Onar Valk, P. ve Backus, A. (2013). Syntactic Change in an Immigrant Language: From Non-finite to Finite Subordinate Clauses in Turkish. Eesti ja soome-ugri keeleteaduse ajakiri. Journal of Estonian and Finno- Ugric Linguistics, 4(2), 7-29.
• Poplack, S. (2001). Variability, Frequency and Productivity in the Irrealis Domain of French. J. Bybee ve P. Hopper (Ed.) Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure içinde (ss. 405-28). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
• Poplack, S. ve Tagliamonte, S. (1999). The Grammaticization of Going to in (African American) English. Language Variation and Change, 11, 315-42.
• Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a Language: A Usage-Based Theory of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Thomason, S. G. ve Kaufman, T. S. (1988). Language Contact, Creolization and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Van Hout, R. ve Muysken, P. (1994). Modeling Lexical Borrowability. Language and Variation, 6(1), 39-62.
• Verschik, A. (2019). English-Estonian Code-copying in Blogs: Combining a Contact Linguistic and Cognitive Approach. Zenner, E., Backus, A., Winter-Froemel, E. (Ed.). Cognitive Contact Linguistics. Placing Usage, Meaning and Mind at the Core of Contact-induced Variation and Change (Cognitive Linguistics Research; Vol. 62) içinde (ss. 253- 277). Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Vertommen, B. (2019). Language Alternation and the State-event Contrast: A Case-study of Dutch-Turkish and Dutch-Moroccan Heritage Speakers. E. Zenner, A. Backus ve E. Winter-Froemel, (Ed.), Cognitive Contact Linguistics. Placing Usage, Meaning and Mind at the Core of Contact-induced Variation and Change (Cognitive Linguistics Research; Vol. 62) içinde (ss. 51-80). Berlin/Boston: Mouton de Gruyter.
• Zeige, L. E. (2014). On Cognition and Communication in Usage-based Models of Language Change. E. Coussé ve F. von Mengden (Ed.), Usage-Based Approaches to Language Change içinde (ss. 49-80). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.