Boundaries of Irrealis in Turkish
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10990915Keywords:
Irrealis, unrealisation, absence, ambiguity, Turkish, semanticsAbstract
Different categories of grammar function separately or together for semantics. Phonological, morphological, lexical, or syntactic features of the grammatical layers reflecting language's internal structure serve semantics. The primary purpose of all these categories is to express tangible or intangible entities in the universe. However, language also serves to describe what is absent and unrealised. Reality (realis) refers to a meta-domain of meaning, determined by grammatical categories, in which a notion, event, or situation expresses an existing reality. Realis can also reflect the mood of the speaker. On the other hand, irrealis refers to a meta-meaning domain in which the reality of a notion, event, or situation is not fully known, and even in cases where it is known, the reality is not certain. Irrealis can occur completely or partially in sentences formed with nouns and verbs. Irrealis has different types. This study draws the semantic boundaries of the notion of irrealis in Turkish. These boundaries are determined to include unrealisation, absence, ambiguity, affinity, and approximation. In addition to these, different markers also draw the boundaries of irrealis in Turkish.
References
Ağca, Ferruh. Budist Türk Çevresi Metinlerinde Olumsuzluk ve Yokluk Şekilleri. Ankara: Türk Kültürünü Araştırma Enstitüsü Yayınları, 2010.
Akşehirli, Soner. “Türkçe’de Konuşma Zamanı, Olay Zamanı ve Referans Zamanı İlişkileri.” Turkish Studies, no. 5/4, (2010): 15-73.
Aslan Demir, Sema. “İstek Kipliği, Gerçeklik, Gerçekleştirilebilirlik.” VII. Uluslararası Dil, Yazın ve Deyişbilim Sempozyumu Bildiri Kitabı I içinde, 581-590. Konya: Selçuk Üniversitesi Basım Evi, 2007.
Auwera, Johan van der and Vladimir A. Plungian. “Modality’s Semantic Map.” Linguistic Typology 2 (1998): 79-124.
Aygen-Tosun, Gülşat. “Türkçe’de Koşul Tümcelerinin Bazı Sözdizimsel ve Anlambilimsel Özellikleri.” In XI. Dilbilim Kurultayı: Bildiriler, edited by D. Zeyrek and Ş. Ruhi, 35-45. Ankara: ODTÜ, Eğitim Fakültesi Yabancı Diller Eğitimi Bölümü Yayınları, 1997.
Başdaş, Cahit. “Türkmen Türkçesinde Olumsuzluk ve Yokluk.” Türklük Bilimi Araştırmaları, no. 37 (2015): 61-72.
Bugenhagen, Robert D. “The Semantics of Irrealis in Austronesian Languages of Papua New Guinea: A Cross-Linguistic Study.” In Topics in Descriptive Austronesian Linguistics (Semaian 11), edited by Ger. P. Reesink, 1-39. Leiden: Vakgroep Talen en Culturen van Zuidoost-Azië en Oceanië, 1993.
Bybee, Joan L. “‘Irrealis’ as a grammatical category.” Anthropological Linguistics 40, (1998). 257-271.
Comrie, Bernard. Tense. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Declerck, Renaat. “The Definition of Modality.” In Cognitive Approaches to Tense Aspect and Epistemic Modality, edited by A. Patard and F. Brisard, 21-41. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing, 2011.
Deniz Yılmaz, Özlem. “Türkiye Türkçesinde Gerçekleşmemiş Olanak Kipi (Konyunktif, Subjonktif).” Marmara Türkiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi, no. 1(1) (2014): 135-147.
Denizer, Faik Utkan. “Türkçede Karşıolgusallık.” Doktora Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 2023.
Elliott, Jennifer R. “Realis and Irrealis: Forms and Concepts of the Grammaticalisation of Reality.” Linguistic Typology, no. 4 (2000): 55-90.
Ergene, Oğuz. “Türkiye Türkçesinde Benzerlik, Yakınlık, Yaklaşıklık, Denklik ve Özdeşlik İfadeleri.” International Journal Of Languages’ Education And Teaching, no. 6/3 (2018): 395-440.
Exter, Mats. “Realis and Irrealis in Wogeo: A Valid Category?” In Melnesian Languages on the Edge of Asia: Challenges for the 21st Century (Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication 5, edited by Marian Klamer, 174-190. Honolulu: University of Hawaii’s Press, 2012.
Gijn, Rik van and Sonja Gipper. “Irrealis in Yurakaré and Other Languages: On the Cross-Linguistic Consistency of an Elusive Category.” In Cross-linguistic Semantics of Tense, Aspect, and Modality (Linguistik Aktuell 148), edited by Helen de Hoop and Andrej Malchukov, 155-178. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing, 2009.
Givón, Thomas. Syntax: An Introduction. Amsterdam: Benjamins Publishing, 2001.
Hirik, Erkan. Evliyâ Çelebi Seyahatnâmesi’nin Grameri: Fiil. Kayseri: Kimlik Yayınları, 2019.
Hirik, Erkan. “Türkçede Varlık-Yokluk Bağlamında Yakınlık Belirten İşaretleyiciler.” TYB Akademi, no. 10 (2020): 39-65.
Hirik, Seçil. “Türkçede ‘Zamanüstülük’.” Çanakkale Araştırmaları Türk Yıllığı, no. 17/27 (2019): 209-225.
Hirik, Seçil. Türkiye Türkçesinde Bilgi Kiplikleri. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınları, 2019.
Hoffman, Paul, Matthew A. Lambon Ralph and Timothy T. Rogers. “Semantic Diversity: A Measure of Semantic Ambiguity Based On Variability in the Contextual Usage of Words.” Behavior Research Methods, no. 45 (2013): 718-730.
Johanson, Lars. “Turkic Indirectives, Evidentials.” In Turkic, Iranian and Neighbouring Languages, edited by Lars Johanson and Bo Utas, 61-87. Berlin&New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2000.
Karadoğan, Ahmet. Türkçede Kılınış. Ankara: Divan Kitap, 2009.
Kerimoğlu, Caner. Kiplik İncelemeleri ve Türkçe. İzmir: Dinozor Kitabevi, 2011.
Palmer, Frank R. Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Pietrandrea, Paola. “The Conceptual Structure of Irreality: A focus on Non-Exclusion of-Factuality as a Conceptual and a Linguistic Category.” Language Sciences, no. 34 (2012): 184-199.
Ruhi Şükriye, Deniz Zeyrek and Ümit Deniz Turan. “Koşul Tümcelerinde Varsayımsallık ve Gerçek Karşıtlığı.” In XIII. Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildiriler, edited by A. S. Özsoy and E. E. Taylan, 19-29. İstanbul: Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Yayınevi, 2000.
Salan, Erkan. Eski Anadolu Türkçesinde Sınırlandırma Yapıları. Ankara: TDK Yayınları, 2020.
Shiro, Martha. “Expressions of Epistemic Modality and the Construction of Narrative Stance in Venezuelan Children’s Stories.” Psychology of Language and Communication, no. 8/2 (2004): 35-56.
Small, Steven L., Garrison W Cottrell ve Michael K Tanenhaus. Lexical Ambiguity Resolution: Perspective from Psycholinguistics, Neuropsychology and Artificial Intelligence. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science, 2013.
Turgay, Tacettin. “Against the Mood Account of Turkish Nominalizers.” Zemin 2 (Aralık 2021): 162-182. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8017414
Üstünova, Kerime. “Dilbilgisel Olumsuzlayıcılar.” Uluslararası Türkçe Edebiyat Kültür Eğitim Dergisi, no. 5/4 (2016): 1703-1715.
Üzüm, Melike. “Türkçede Karşıolgusallık: Korpus Temelli Bir İnceleme.” In Dilbilimde Güncel Tartışmalar, edited by A. Uçar, P. İbe Akcan and F. Çetintaş Yıldırım, 123-130. Ankara: Dilbilim Derneği Yayınları, 2020.
Üzüm, Melike. Eski Anadolu Türkçesinde Epistemik Kiplik: Kısas-ı Enbiya Örneği. Ankara: Nobel Akademi Yayınları, 2019.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. “Some Verbal Categories in Hopi.” Language, no. 14 (1938): 275-286.
Zempleni, Monika-Zita, Remco Renken, John C. J. Hoeks, Johannes M. Hoogduin and Laurie A. Stowe. “Semantic Ambiguity Processing in Sentence Context: Evidence from Event-Related fMRI.” NeuroImage, no. 34/3 (2007): 1270-1279.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nesir: Edebiyat Araştırmaları Dergisi
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
