turkish phonology and morphology (türkçe ses ve b‹ç‹mb‹lg‹s‹)

4
Turkish Phonology and Morphology (Türkçe Ses ve Biçim Bilgisi)
three different pronunciations. The choice of which of the three alternatives occurs
with which word is not arbitrary. Rather it is rule governed – which of the three
pronunciations to occur is determined by the final sound of the word. Thus, the
plural suffix is represented as /s/ in the phonological component but is realized as
[s] or [z] or [´z] phonetically. Described as such, there is a mismatch between how
we represent the plural suffix and how it is actually pronounced. If we say that
there are three separate plural suffixes, ‘s’ (as in cats), ‘z’ (as in dogs), and ‘´z’ (as
in buses), then that would suggest that each word and its plural form is memorized
separately as unanalyzable wholes. There is evidence that that is not the case –
when a native speaker is given the singular form of a word that s/he has never
heard before, a nonsense word (a word that has no meaning) for example, and
asked to produce the plural form, s/he would produce the correct pronunciation.
This suggests that the underlying representation of the plural form is /s/ while
its phonetic realization, or surface realization, may be [s] or [z] or [´z]. Thus the
underlying representation and the surface realization may be different.
Let us consider an example from Turkish and take the plural suffix. The Turkish
plural suffix has two different surface realization, -ler (as in ev-ler) and –lar (as in
dolap-lar). You would all agree that ev and evler or dolap and dolaplar are not
memorized separately. Otherwise, the following four forms in (I) and (II) would
necessarily be memorized as separate words as well.
(1)
(I) a. süt (II) a. av
b. süt-çü b. av-c›
c. süt-çü-ler c. av-c›-lar
d. süt-çü-ler-den d. av-c›-lar-dan
If that were the case, the shared meanings by the four words would not have
been obvious. However, as native speakers, we know that the meanings of the
four forms are related as they share the same root, we know the relation between
the root and the suffixes, and the rules of using the correct form with a given
word. That is why we know that the suffix –çü in (I) and –c› in (II) are the same
suffix although these two forms are different phonetically (the same is true for the
suffixes –ler/-lar and –den/-dan), and that these differences in the form are due to
differences in the roots in terms of the sounds each root contains.
To show the relation between/among the different forms in the surface
realization, an underlying representation for each root or suffix (more correctly
affix) has to be posited. This underlying representation may or may not be identical
to the surface realization. The underlying representation of the English plural
suffix can be said to be ‘s’. As shown above, in certain cases ‘s’ will remain as ‘s’,
underlying representation and surface realization being the same, and in other
cases rules will change ‘s’ either to ‘z’ or ‘´z’, surface realizations being different
from the underlying representation.
In the phonological component, an underlying representation for each unit
(i.e., words, affixes) is posited. The underlying representation is notated between
slashes (/ /). Thus /s/ would indicate that that is the underlying representation of
the English plural suffix. The surface realization, on the other hand, is notated
between square brackets ([ ]). Thus, the three different surface realizations would
be represented as [s], [z], and [´z], as schematized below.