On Turkic transformativizers and ... - Turkic Languages

More documents

Recommendations

Info

On Turkic transformativizers and nontransformativizers 185 eve-, yiber-, yiver-, etc. (Jarring 1964: 137). Note also that the combination ï:δ- + ber- is used in similar functions in some languages that have retained the old verb ï:δ- ‘to send’, e.g. Karaim iy-e ber- ‘to release’, and the ingressive constructions B + iy-e ber- and B + ïz-a ber- in languages of the Altay Turkic and Khakas-Shor types, respectively (Radloff 1893: 1387, 1409, 1411; Šencova 1997: 81-82). Certain Turkic postverbial constructions have served as the basis for further grammaticalization, namely the creation of viewpoint aspect items. The shape of these items has often been strongly reduced, e.g. the Khakas present tense marker -(p)čA < *B + čatïr. It is also conceivable that the East Old Turkic postterminal marker -miš and its cognates, Turkish -mIš and Yakut -Bit, have evolved from a postverbial construction with an auxiliary verb whose lexical source was bïš- ‘to ripen, to become mature’; cf. Turkish piş- ‘to ripen, to mature, to be perfected, to be cooked’, etc. (Johanson 2003: 287). Postterminal items such as kelmiš, gelmiş and kelbit ‘having come’ do not show any remnants of a converb suffix, but B deletion as observed in modern Khakas kil < kil-ĭp may also have occurred in older stages of Turkic. The marker -GAn, which corresponds to -mIš in most Turkic languages, may go back to a similar postverbial construction with an auxiliary verb whose lexical source was qa:n- ‘to be satisfied, satiated, repleted’, ‘to be well (sufficiently) done’. A and B converbs The constructions dealt with so far contain converb suffixes of the B type. In certain nontransformative constructions, however, suffixes of the A type are also employed, e.g. Yakut kül-e sïrït- ‘to laugh constantly’, oxt-o sïrït- ‘to fall constantly’ (source verb ‘TO MOVE’). We shall consider some cases in which one and the same auxiliary verb may occur with both A and B markers. It seems that the two suffix types retain their respective aspectual values and that there is no free variation between them in postverbial constructions. A + ïδ- vs. B + ïδ- It was assumed above that +T-markers of the types -(I)bIS- and -(I)bIt- go back to the construction B + ï:δ- ‘to send’. In East Old Turkic, however, the auxiliary verb ïδ- combines with the A converb to express what is mostly taken to be completion, but rather seems to be sudden and quick action; cf. Erdal’s appropriate translation of sanč-a ïδ- as “to rout in a whirlwind” (2004: 257). The combination of the finitransformative auxiliary verb with the intraterminal A converb yields the meaning ‘to bring something (suddenly) to a point between the limits, in the posttransformative state, i.e. in medias res. It is impossible to decide to which type, A + ïδ- or B + ïδ-, the Khalaj imperatives al-i and al-di:z ‘take’ originally belonged.
186 Lars Johanson A + tur- Some Turkic languages exhibit the postverbial construction A + tur- along with B + tur-. The function of A + tur- is based on the intraterminal value of the A converb and the initiotransformative auxiliary tur-. A + tur- is mostly continuative, i.e. it tends to designate the continuation of an action that has already begun. It often expresses ‘to continue to do’, ‘to still be doing’, ‘to go on doing’, ‘keep doing’, etc. In East Old Turkic / Ancient Uyghur, tur- was used from an early date as an auxiliary verb with different shades of meaning, usually ‘to continue to do’ (Clauson 1972: 529b). It seems, however, that it is the combination with the A converb that signals continuative meanings, e.g. ïδ-u tur- ‘to keep sending’, yorï-yu tur- ‘to walk on’, qora-yu tur- ‘to continue to diminish’, aldayu tur- ‘to keep deceiving’. B + tur-, however, seems to be a -T-marker, e.g. közet-ip tur- ‘to watch (constantly)’ (Gabain 1941: 131: “küzet-ip tur- ständig jemanden behüten”). Yakut A + tur- expresses continuation, e.g. tü:h-e tur- ‘to keep raining’, bar-a tur- ‘to continue to go’, sü:r-e tur- ‘to keep running’, kepsi-y tur- ‘to continue telling’, kördör-ö tur- ‘to continue to show’ (Xaritonov 1960, 63-65, 92-93, Korkina et al. 1982: 280-202). Turkish A + dur- and B + dur are often claimed to express durativity and continuous action (Kononov 1956: 210, Lewis 1967: 191), e.g. söylen-e dur- and söylen-ip dur- ‘to keep grumbling’. It seems, however, that A + dur- tends to be continuative, e.g. düşün-e dur- ‘to keep thinking’, çalış-a dur- ‘to continue working’, whereas B + dur- is a -T-marker, e.g. düşün-üp dur- ‘to think continuously, repeatedly’, çalış-ıp dur- ‘to work constantly’. Compare the expression A + dursun ‘[this] may continue [but now another event begins]’, used in narratives to introduce the shift to a new topic. Demir provides continuative examples from a south Anatolian dialect of the province Alanya, e.g. gėd-e dur-‘to go on (meanwhile)’, baq-a dur- ‘to continue to look (meanwhile)’, yap-a dur ‘to carry on doing’ (1993: 39, 69-73). The combination A + tur- very early contributed to the expression of intraterminal aspect in Turkic languages of the Northwestern, Southeastern and Northeastern groups. The construction A + turur, literally ‘stands doing’, was grammaticalized into a viewpoint aspect marker, renewing the expression of focal intraterminality and occurring with actional phrases of all semantic types. For example, Kirghiz kör-et ‘sees’ (originally ‘is seeing’) belong to this category, whereas kör-üp tur- serves -Tmarking. Some Turkic languages have later renewed the expression of intraterminality by means of -A tur-a, e.g. Kumyk bar-a tur-a ‘is going’. Also in these languages, B + tur- has remained a -T-marker, e.g. bar-ïp tur- ‘to go (constantly, repeatedly)’. Continuative meaning is expressed by Tatar imperatives marked by A + tŏr, e.g. bar-a tŏr ‘go (meanwhile)’, yaz-a tŏr ‘keep writing’. Tatar B + tŏr-, however, is a -T-marker, e.g. qurq-ïŸp tŏr- ‘to fear’, qara-p tŏr- ‘to look’. Why is Tatar A + tŏr used
Page 1 and 2: On Turkic transformativizers and no
Page 3 and 4: 182 Lars Johanson 2. type B, ending
Page 5: 184 Lars Johanson The combination o
Page 9 and 10: 188 Lars Johanson remain lying’ i
Page 11: 190 Lars Johanson Gabain, Annemarie

On Turkic transformativizers and ... - Turkic Languages

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?