Structural variation in Turkish complex predicates

Key, Gregory; Tat, Deniz; Zeyrek, Deniz; Sağın-Şimşek, Çiğdem; Ataş, Ufuk; Rehbein, Jochen

doi:10.2307/j.ctvc770nr.16

Ankara Papers in Turkish and Turkic Linguistics 2015

DOI: 10.2307/j.ctvc770nr.16

|View full text |Cite

Structural variation in Turkish complex predicates

Gregory Key¹,

Deniz Tat²,

Deniz Zeyrek³

et al.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2022

Publication Types

Select...

Article1

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent1

Authors

Journals

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…+predicative blocks the insertion of verbal elements, such as restore. Key and Tat (2014) propose that competition occurs only at the syntactic terminals during vocabulary insertion, e.g. -e and -aj compete for insertion in the presence of the root √MONT.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans

Tat

2022

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, I revisit the claim that nominals denoting complex events must derive from discernible verbal stems and must be headed by an overt nominalizer. I show that Turkish has a set of nominals, crucially of foreign origin, which provides counter-evidence to both claims. From the perspective of Turkish grammar, they are morphologically noncompositional, manifesting neither a detectable verbal basis nor an overt nominalizer although they are categorically complex event nominals. Since (zero-)derived nominals of Turkic origin do not allow argument structure, the puzzling makeup of underived complex event nominals in question boils down to their loan word nature. I show that their behavior is different from both derived nominals as well as gerundive nominals in important ways. I claim that they are defective nominalizations lacking an nP representation. After reviewing previous accounts of these nominals, I consider three syntactic approaches to word derivation, which differ in their theoretical assumptions only in granularity, and conclude that the Spanning approach of Bye and Svenonius provides us with a conceptually superior account.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans

Tat

2022

Languages

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

hi@scite.ai

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

Structural variation in Turkish complex predicates

Cited by 1 publication

References 6 publications

Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans

Lexical Borrowing Targets Spans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About