Predicative possession in Oghuz and Kipchak Turkic languages
This article studies syntactic, semantic and discursive properties of non-subordinate (main) clauses conveying possession in Oghuz and Kipchak Turkic languages. In Turkic, the concept of possession is typically encoded by clauses based on existential predicates. The language-specific and crosslinguistic properties of two predicate types, {bar} and {bol}, will be contrastively surveyed. As for the marking of possessor in clauses containing {bar}, three patterns will be described, one of which is a contact-induced structure restricted to Turkic varieties in Iran. As a multifunctional verb, {bol} can convey, among other things, dynamic or static possession. The results indicate that the clauses based on the static possession marker {bol} are more operative in Kipchak languages and in Turkmen (East Oghuz), than in West Oghuz languages. It will further be shown that the structures based on {bar} or the static marker {bol} typically exhibit discourse-related distribution in the respective languages.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Clauses based on the non-verbal predicate {bar}
- 2.1{bar} in existence and possessive clauses
- 2.2Combinations of {bar} with copular markers
- 2.3Possessor marking in {bar} type of clauses
- Pattern 1
- 2.3.2Pattern 2
- 2.3.3Pattern 3
- 2.3.4Co-existence of genuine Turkic and copied patterns in Turkic varieties of Iran
- 3.Clauses based on the verbal predicate {bol}
- 3.1The multifunctional verb {bol}
- 3.2{bol} in possessive clauses
- 3.2.1{bol} as a dynamic possession marker
- 3.2.2{bol} as a static possession marker
- 4.Distribution of {bar} and {bol}
- 5.Summary
-
Abbreviations
-
Notes
-
References
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y.
2013 Possession and ownership: A cross-linguistic perspective. In
Aikhenvald &
Dixon (eds), 1–64.
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. & Dixon, R. M. W.
(eds) 2013 Possession and Ownership. A Cross-linguistic Typology. Oxford: OUP.
Clark, Larry
1998 Turkmen Reference Grammar [
Turcologica 34]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Csató, Éva Á.
2001 Karaim. In
Minor Languages of Europe [
Bochum-Essener Beiträge zur Sprachwandelforschung 30],
Thomas Stolz (ed.), 1–24. Bochum: Brockmeyer.
Csató, Éva Á.
2019 On Turkish non-canonical possessives. In
Possession in Languages of Europe and North and Central Asia [
Studies in Language Companion Series 206],
Lars Johanson,
Lidia Federica Mazzitelli &
Irina Nevskaya (eds). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (this volume)
Dehghani, Yavar
2000 A Grammar of Iranian Azari. Munich: Lincom.
Doerfer, Gerhard
1988 Grammatik des Chaladsch [
Turcologica 4]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Doǧan, Talip
2010 Urmiye Aǧızları. PhD dissertation, Kırıkkale Üniversitesi.
Ersen-Rasch, Margarete
2009 Baschkirisch. Lehrbuch für Anfänger und Fortgeschrittene. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
GA = Kösoǧlu, Nevzat
(ed.)
1999
Türkiye dışındaki Türk edebiyatları antolojisi, 12: Romanya ve Gagavuz Türk edebiyatı
. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
Heine, Bernd
1997 Possession: Cognitive Sources, Forces, and Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.
Johanson, Lars
1971
Aspekt im Türkischen. Vorstudien zu einer Beschreibung des türkeitürkischen Aspektsystems [Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. Studia Turcica Upsaliensia I]. Uppsala: University of Uppsala.
KA = Kösoǧlu, Nevzat
(ed.)
2003
Türkiye dışındaki Türk edebiyatları antolojisi, 23: Karakalpak edebiyatı
. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
Karakoç, Birsel
2000 The finite copula bol- in Noghay and its functional equivalents in Turkish. In
Studies on Turkish and Turkic Languages [
Turcologica 46],
Aslı Göksel &
Celia Kerslake (eds), 143–149. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Karakoç, Birsel
2005 Das finite Verbalsystem im Nogaischen [
Turcologica 58]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Karakoç, Birsel
2009 Notes on subject markers and copular forms in Turkish and in some Turkic varieties of Iran: A comparative study.
Turkic Languages 13: 208–224.
Karakoç, Birsel
2014 Non-past copular markers in Turkish. In
On Diversity and Complexity of Languages Spoken in Europe and North and Central Asia, [
Studies in Language Companion Series 164],
Pirkko Suihkonen &
Lindsay J. Whaley (eds) 221–250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Karakoç, Birsel
2017 Subordination of existence and possessive clauses in Oghuz and Kipchak Turkic languages.
Turkic Languages 21: 199–233.
Karini, Jahangir
2009 Erdebil İli Aǧızları. PhD dissertation, Gazi Üniversitesi.
Klein, Wolfgang & Levinson, Stephen
(eds)
2009 The Expression of Possession. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
KMA = Kösoǧlu, Nevzat
(ed.)
2002
Türkiye dışındaki Türk edebiyatları antolojisi, 22: Karaçay-Malkar edebiyatı
. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
KUA = Kösoǧlu, Nevzat
(ed.)
2002
Türkiye dışındaki Türk edebiyatları antolojisi, 20: Kumuk edebiyatı
. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
ḲXÄ =
1988 Ḳazaḳ xalïḳ ädebiyeti. Ertegiler. Tom I, II, III. Almatï. Žazušï.
Lambton, Ann K.S.
1957 Persian Grammar. Cambridge: CUP.
Mazzitelli, Lidia Federica
2015 The Expression of Predicative Possession: A Comparative Study of Belarusian and Lithuanian. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nevskaya, Irina
1997 Tipologija lokativnyx konstrukcij v trjurkskix jazykax Južnoj Sibiri (na materiale šorskogo jazyka).
Habilitation dissertation, Institute of Philology, Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Novosibirsk.
Öztopçu, Kurtuluş
2003 Elementary Azerbaijani. Santa Monica CA: Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları Dizisi.
Stassen, Leon
2009 Predicative Possession. Oxford: OUP.
TA = Kösoǧlu, Nevzat
(ed.)
2001
Türkiye dışındaki Türk edebiyatları antolojisi 17, 18, 19: Tatar edebiyatı. Volume I, II and III. Ankara: Kültür Bakanlığı yayınları.
Welsapar, AK.
2002 Kepjebaş. Roman. Stockholm: Gün neşirýaty.
Cited by
Cited by 2 other publications
Johanson, Lars
2021.
Turkic,
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.