LINGUIST List 19.2353
Fri Jul 25 2008
Diss: Morphology/Syntax/Semantics: Kosaner: 'Predication in Turkish'
Editor for this issue: Hannah Morales
<hannahlinguistlist.org>
1. Ozgun
Kosaner,
Predication in Turkish
Message 1: Predication in Turkish
Date: 25-Jul-2008
From: Ozgun Kosaner <okosaneryahoo.com>
Subject: Predication in Turkish
E-mail this message to a friend
Institution: Dokuz Eylül University
Program: general linguistics
Dissertation Status: Completed
Degree Date: 2008
Author: Ozgun Kosaner
Dissertation Title: Predication in Turkish
Linguistic Field(s):
Linguistic Theories
Morphology
Pragmatics
Semantics
Syntax
Subject Language(s): Turkish (tur)
Dissertation Director:
Lutfiye Oktar
Dissertation Abstract:
This study sets forth from the definition of predication as 'the processcreating new meanings by combining the meaning of the argument withselected aspects of the meaning of the predicate', which has been a matterfor discussion in philosophy, logic and linguistics since Aristoteles,seeks answers to questions 'How is the predication in Turkish formed?' and'How is the interaction between pragmatics, semantics and morphosyntaxcoded?' in order to test the basic hypothesis designated as 'verbalpredication in Turkish is realised as a process that displays variousconstructions under the influence of the pragmatic, semantic andmorphosyntactic factors'. To answer these research questions, bothdiachronic and synchronic corpuses were built and analysed in thetheoretical framework of Functional Discourse Grammar. After discussing thequestion of how the predication in Turkish is formed, the studyinvestigates what kind of an interaction the pragmatic, semantic andmorphosyntactic factors exhibit.
As the result of the analyses conducted using Functional Discourse Grammar,the first question is answered in terms of "Predication Frames" whichprovide ways to keep and organise the information corresponding to theState-of-Affairs. The analyses exhibit the structures presented by thetransitive predications in Turkish and define the factors that affect thesestructures. In order to answer the second question, how the participants inargument positions in the predication frames are coded is examined. Thefindings show that speakers prefer coding the important / salient / newinformation with full NP's or Pronouns instead of zero anaphora, in otherwords, speakers access the contextual information while forming predications.
When the anwers of the two research questions are combined, this studyasserts that speakers choose a certain predication frame using the top-downinformation first, and then they code the linguistic and lexical items tocode the participants, namely they use the bottom-up information. In theprocess of selecting the predication frame appropriate for theState-of-Affairs the situational information is operative; whereas in thecoding of the participants the contextual information is operative.
|