İmparator Çizelgesi vs. İmparatorlar Çizelgesi: On the (Non)-Use of Plural Non-Head Nouns in Turkish Nominal Compounding
Çeşitli dillerde gerçekleştirilen (ruh)dilbilimsel çalışmalarda, katılımcıların ad tamlamalarında düzenli çoğul adları tamlayan olarak kullanmaktan kaçındıkları, ancak düzensiz adları gerek tekil gerekse çoğul halde tamlayan olarak kullandıkları tespit edilmiştir. “Sözcükler ve Kurallar” kuramının savunucularına göre bu bulgu öne sürdükleri düzenli-düzensiz ayrımının net bir yansımasıdır ve varsaydıkları zihinsel modelin açık bir ifadesidir. Türkçede düzensiz çoğullaştırılan ad bulunmadığından, Türkçe “Sözcükler ve Kurallar” kuramı için özel bir durum teşkil etmektedir. Bu çalışmada, söz konusu modelin Türkçe için geçerliliğini denetlemek amacıyla Türkçe anadil konuşucularının ad tamlamalarında çoğul tamlayan kullanıp kullanmadıkları incelenmektedir. Derlem incelemesinden ve deneysel bir çalışmadan elde edilen sonuçlar bire bir örtüşmezken, genel olarak Türkçe anadil konuşucularının daha önce incelenmiş olan başka dillerin (İngilizce, Almanca gibi) anadil konuşucuları gibi, ad tamlamalarında çoğul adları tamlayan olarak daha az kullandıkları ortaya
(Psycho)linguistic studies conducted in various languages have shown that participants refrain from using regular plural nouns as non-head nouns within nominal compounds but do make use of singular as well as plural irregular nouns as non-heads. According to proponents of the “Words-and-Rules” theory, this finding is an unambiguous reflection of the regular-irregular distinction that they presume and clear evidence for the mental model that they support. Since irregular nouns do not exist in Turkish, the language constitutes a special case for the “Words-and-Rules” theory. In this study, it has been investigated whether native speakers of Turkish employ plural nouns as non-heads within noun-noun compounds to examine the validity of the “Words-and-Rules” theory for Turkish. In spite of the fact that the results obtained from a corpus-analysis and a paper and pencil experiment yielded findings that did not perfectly overlap, it was found that Turkish native speakers, like native speakers of other languages investigated before (such as English and German), overall preferred plural nouns to a lesser extent than they did singular nouns as non-heads in nominal compounds.
___
Aslan, E. & Altan A. 2006. “The role of -(s)I in Turkish indefinite nominal compounds”. Dil Dergisi, 131, p. 57-75.Berent, I. & Pinker, S. 2007. “The dislike of regular plurals in compounds”. The Mental Lexicon, 2, 2, p. 129-181.
Berent, I. & Pinker, S. 2008. “Compound formation is constrained by morphology. A reply to Seidenberg, MacDonald & Haskell”. The Mental Lexicon, 3, 2, p. 176-187.
Berent, I., Pinker, S., Tzelgov, J., Bibi, U. & Goldfarb, L. 2005. “Computation of semantic number from morphological information”. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, p. 342-358.
Birtürk, A. A. & Fong, S. 2001. “A modular approach to Turkish noun compounding: the integration of a finite-state model”. Proceedings of the 6th Natural Language Processing Pacific Rim Symposium (NLPRS 2001), p. 525-530.
Clahsen, H. 2006. “Linguistic perspectives on morphological processing”. In D. Wunderlich (ed.), Advances in the Theory of the Lexicon (p. 355-388). Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin.
Corbett, G. 2000. Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Elman, J., Bates, E., Johnson, M., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Parisi, D., & Plunkett, K. 1996. Rethinking Innateness: A connectionist perspective on development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Francis, W. N. 1964. “A standard sample of present-day. English for use with digital computers”. Report to the US Office of Education on Cooperative Research No. E–007. Providence, RI: Brown University.
Gordon, P. 1985. “Level-ordering in lexical development”. Cognition, 21, p. 73-93.
Gordon, P. & Alegre, M. 1999. “Is there a dual system for regular inflections?” Brain and Language, 68, p. 212-217.
Göksel, A. & Kerslake, C. 2005. Turkish: A Comprehensive Grammar. USA and Canada: Routledge.
Haskell, T. R., MacDonald, M., C., & Seidenberg, M. S. 2003. “Language learning and innateness: Some implications of compounds research”. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 2, p. 119-163.
Juhasz, B. J., Starr, M. S., Inhoff, A. & Placke, L. 2003. “The effects of morphology on the processing of compound words: Evidence from lexical decision, naming and eye fixations”. British Journal of Psychology, 94, p. 223-244.
Kırkıcı, B. 2007. “The mental processing of L2 English lexical compounds: a developmental dual-mechanism account”. EUROSLA Yearbook, 7, p. 7-25.
Kiparsky, P. 1982. “Lexical morphology and phonology”. I. S. Yang (ed.) Linguistics in the morning calm (p. 3-91). Seoul: Hansin.
Kornfilt, J. 1997. Turkish. London: Routledge.
Lardiere, D. 1995. “L2 acquisition of English synthetic compounding is not constrained by level-ordering (and neither, probably, is L1)”. Second Language Research, 11, p. 20–56.
Libben, G., Gibson, M., Yoon, Y.B. & Sandra, D. 2003. “Compound fracture: the role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness”. Brain and Language, 84, p. 50-64.
Marcus, G. F., Brinkmann, U., Clahsen, H., Wiese, R., & Pinker, S. 1995. “German inflection: The exception that proves the rule”. Cognitive Psychology, 29, p. 189–256.
Murphy, V. 2000. “Compounding and the representation of L2 inflectional morphology”. Language Learning, 50, 1, p. 153-197.
Oflazer, K., Say, B., Hakkani-Tür, D. & Tür, G. 2003. “Design for a Turkish Treebank”. In A. Abeille (ed.), Building and Exploiting Parsed Corpora. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Özsoy, A. S. 2004. “Dışişleri eski bakanı ve Türkçenin yeni yapısı.” Journal of Turkish Studies, 28/I, p. 247-256.
Pinker, S. 1991. “Rules of language”. Science, 253, p. 530–535.
Pinker, S. 1999. Words and rules: The ingredients of language. New York: Basic Books.
Pinker, S. & Ullman, M. 2002. “The past and future of the past tense”. Trends in Cognitive Science, 6, p. 456-463.
Rumelhart, D. E., & McClelland, J. L. 1986. “On learning the past tenses of English verbs”. In J. L. McClelland & D. E. Rumelhart (eds.), Parallel distributed processing (Vol. 2, p. 216-271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Say, B., Zeyrek, D., Oflazer, K. & Özge, U. 2002. “Development of a Corpus and a Treebank for Present-day Written Turkish”. In İmer, K. and Doğan, G. (eds.) Current Research in Turkish Linguistics. Proceedings of 11th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Eastern Mediterranean University, Northern Cyprus. (p. 183-192).
Schreuder, R., & Baayen, R. H. 1997. “How complex simplex words can be”. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, p. 118-139.
Senghas, A., Kim, J. J., & Pinker, S. 2005. Plurals-inside compounds: Morphological constraints and their implications. Unpublished manuscript, Dept. of Psychology, Harvard University.
Ullman, M. T. 2001. “The neural basis of lexicon and grammar in first and second language: The declarative/procedural model”. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, p. 105-122.
Underhill, R. 1976. Turkish Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- ISSN: 1300-8552
- Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 2 Sayı
- Başlangıç: 1990
- Yayıncı: Dilbilim Derneği