ÇAĞDAŞ TÜRKÇEDE KELİME GRUPLARININ İŞLEVSEL TASNİFİ ÜZERİNE (original) (raw)

The place of the word groups that are situated in the syntax in Turkish is very essential. Usually, we can not cover entities, objects or actions with one word so in these situations we prefer to word groups. The word groups, basic in a sentence and formed an integrity in the way of the structure and the meaning was examined by using the many various classification methods in the recent studies. The classification made by those skilled in the dependencies between companents is not expressed in the majority of word groups with clear statements; even morphological and syntax categories are used nested mixed with each other. In this study, by taking the functional classification of word groups which is one of the controversial issues of Turkish grammar. It is emphasized an which facts will be reqarded with and how to be applied in terms of classification. The classification method used in the study has a functional qualification making structure features out as a different morphological classification from the others which have been made so far. In accordance with this purpose, word groups have been classified according to the frames of the grammatical and semantical plans. In the grammatical section, the lexical-morphological level in which the constituent element is classfied; the syntax level which is through with the types of relation and the classification which is done according to the number of conjugating elements. However in the semantical section, the classification related to the word groups with attributive features are used in which tasks. Finally with this quaufication, dissimilation criteria of word groups in terms of grammar and function is confirmed, the functional features of them which can not be explained accurately with the comparison technique have been clarified. When the determined unit of a phrase, which is the head lexical item that directs the group, is of a noun or a verb origin word (verb-infinitive, adjective-verb, adverb-verb), it is needed to categorize phrases at this level as of nominals or verbals. Nominal phrases are groups of words which define objects or nominalised actions. Verbal phrases are groups of words in which a determiner unit is in the object position of an action that is involved by a determined unit. Categorization of phrases as verb phrases or noun phrases has a crucial role on identifying the combination types among these units and on deciding how to use phrases for what function. Phrases have to be related to the meanings of units that create them. A determined unit on one hand acquires the defining characteristics of the determiner unit and on the other hand has to retain the meaning that exists in the entire phrase. At syntactic level, units of a phrase are divided into two groups; in one group units are `dependent` on each other and in the other one, units are `independent` from each other. Phrases whose units are dependent on each other can be merged to one another with three combination models which are ordering, determining and coherence. Phrases can be in the form of double unit (ordinary), triplex unit or multiple unit in accordance with their number of components. A phrase component should be a meaningful word on its own or should be in a syntactic relationship with other units so that it can be confirmed as a lexical unit. Words that exist between two units and are implemented with a defining function need to introduce something tangible. This aspect has an important role in splitting phrases into their determiner and determined units because phrases may not always consist of double or triplex units. There may even be an ordinary unit phrase within triplex unit phrases or ordinary unit and triplex unit phrases may be found within multiple unit phrases. In situations like these, determiner and determined units may even include various phrases within themselves at the same time. In order to analyse large phrases flawlessly it is needed to identify the relationship among units correctly. Head units of phrases determine the functional side of a phrase with the help of their lexical-semantic and syntactic characteristics. Nominal phrases, except from adverbial-verb constructions, can be generated by nominalised manners of all types of words. In other words all phrases whose head unit (main factor) is of any word type, except from adverbial-verb, can be used with nominal function in a sentence. Even though a head unit is convenient to be applied as a determiner element, it does not possess the qualities of this manner anymore when it is implemented with nominal function. Units of a phrase can apply all three methods of combining. All of the word types used with determiner function can form definite phrases when they are used as head components. In nominal definite phrases adjectives and adverbs are mostly implemented, however, in verbal definite phrases adjectival-verbs and adverbial-verbs are applied. In definite phrases units are combined via ordering and determining. Definite phrases are divided into two groups according to the type of the head component; one being adjectival and the other one being adverbial. A phrase is called an adjectival if t is able to define the features of an object on its own and when a phrase reports the qualities of a quality, it is called an adverbial. A verbal head unit of definite phrases retains its meaning in terms of tense and in this regard it is separated from nominal phrases. When categorizing phrases, we can name 32 ordinary phrase types with the help of Baskakov`s classification when the criterion we mentioned are taken into account at a structural-grammatical and functional plan level. 16 of these phrases are nominal phrases and the other 16 are verbal phrases and they are separated into modifications and variants according to differences they introduce within themselves. In ordinary phrases nominal usages are more than definite usages. The most important reason of this situation is that the head component in definite phrases cannot be combined to its determiner unit by coherence. In combinations which occur by coherence in noun phrases, the variety of word types creates numerous variants. However, in definite phrases the most widely implemented combining method is the determining one. In most of ordinary phrases, combinations through coherence outnumber the combinations that occur via determining and ordering. Variant numbers of structure types is directly proportional with the frequency of that structure in the language. The usage frequency of structure types, that have a high number of variants, is also high. In ordinary phrases, the structure type that have the most variants is nominal phrases whose determined and determiner unit is a noun. The one with the least variants is the definite phrases whose determined and determiner unit is a verb. In contemporary Turkish, syntactic base at phrase level depends on ordinary phrases. Thus multiple unit phrases at this level occur either by coming side by side of two ordinary phrases or by expansion of an ordinary phrase by taking another word. This expansion forms a determiner phrase if it is in the direction of determiner and it forms a determined phrase if it is in the direction of determined. As a result of the classification of triplex unit phrases, there are 38 different structure types we identify with the help of the categorization of Baskakov. When the determined or determiner unit of triplex unit phrases does not consist of a single unit, these kinds of phrases create modifications. 20 of triplex unit phrases are of verbal structure type and 18 of them are of nominal structure type. The numeral superiority of verbal phrases has also an effect on syntactic combination methods. 16 of the structure types are combined to one another by determining, 14 of them are combined by ordering and 8 of them are bound to each other by coherence. The number of determiner usages in triplex unit phrases is more in comparison to nominal usages. That is one of the reasons of why the number of combinations that occur by coherence is less than the other syntactic combining methods. When ordinary and triplex phrases are handled all together, 40 of the structure types identified in Turkey Turkish possess nominal functions and 30 of them have determiner functions. The reason of why the number of structure types used with nominal function is more is that there are more nouns than verbs in the vocabulary of the language and nouns are mostly used with nominal function. When the structure types of phrases are studied, it is observed that this act of studying gives us extremely valuable information on application and process of the language. In this respect, phrases are among basic building blocks of not only sentences but also of the process of a language. When the studies on phrases in Turkey Turkish are inspected, it is possible to encounter incoherent classifications, obscure definitions and numerous terms which are used to define the same element. This situation makes it difficult to understand and teach phrases. Thus the unification of terminology is the most important thing to do in order to convey the acquired accumulation of knowledge and the studies conducted on this field in a fruitful way. Using different terms to demonstrate the same phenomenon makes the subject even more complicated. Apart from this, the studies carried out on classification of phrases must be covering all features that create these meaningful combinations. Unfortunately current classification methods are not able to identify and explain phrases from all aspects. It is arguable that how our current knowledge will be improved by using different classifications based on the same perspective. When functional features are based on to classify phrases, more accurate results can be acquired in identification and analysis stages.