Are There Aspectless Tensed Clauses in Turkish?

Abstract

Turkish allows finite verb forms that carry tense marking but no overt aspect marking. Unlike those that contain both tense and aspect marking, aspectless forms also lack an auxiliary copula. This is a key difference that Kelepir takes as evidence that aspectless forms derive from clausal structures that lack an aspect projection. However, syntax-morphology mapping is not always isomorphic. Therefore, we also evaluate this proposal from a semantic point of view, raising both empirical and theoretical questions: (1) Is there any aspectual inference associated with morphologically aspectless verbs? (2) Are structures where tense directly combines with a VP compositionally interpretable? While Kelepir’s proposal seems to face challenges in both directions, we argue that the semantic considerations are, in fact, consistent with the clausal structure Kelepir argues for, with broader implications for clause structure and compositional interpretation.