Bu makalede Türkçe, Rusça ve ingilizce'de Özişlevsel ve Şahıssız Genel yapıların, Keyser ve Raeper'in savundukları gibi, sözcüksel değil, sözdizimsel olduğu tezi öne sürülmektedir. Tezi desteklemek amacıyla her üç dilde Özne Yükselten Edilgen, Uyumsuz Çift Edilgen ve Mastar sal Çift Edilgen yapılar incelenmiştir.

Lexical and Syntactical Analysis of Passives Ergatives and Middles in Türkish, Russian and English

This article demonstrates that Passives, Ergatives and Middles in Tiırkish and Russian are syntactical rather than lexical as Keyser and Roeper claim. To support our clainı we enıploy Subject-Raising Passive, Non-Finite Doııble Passive and Infinitival Doııble Passive construetions in all three languages.

___

  • Ailen, M.A. (1978) Morphological Investigations. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs.
  • Chomsky, N.(1984) Lectures on Government & Binding. Dordrecht, Holland: Foris Publications.
  • Dietrich, A.P. (1987) Toward a Syntactic Characterization of Passives, Ergatives and Middles in Russian and Turkish. Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
  • Fagan, Sarah. (1988) "The English Middle," Linguistic bıcjuiry 19, no. 2, 181-203.
  • George, L. & J. Kornfilt, (1977) "Infinitival Double Passives in Turkish," in K. Leffel and D. Bouchard (eds.) North Eastern Linguistic Society, vol. 7, 65-79.
  • Haegeman, L. Introdııction to Government & Binding Theory. Cambridge: Blackweü, Ltd., 1991.
  • Keyser, S.& T.Roeper (1984) "On the Middle and Ergative Constructions in English, "Linguistic Inquiry, vol. 15. no. 3, 381-416.
  • Kornfilt, Jacklin.(1998)"NP-Deletion and Case Marking in Turkish", Studies on Turkish Lingıtistics, METU, Ankara.
  • Roeper, T. and M.E.A. Siegel. "A Lexical Transformation for Verbal Compounds," Linguistic Inguiry 9 (1978) 199-260.