Abstract
This paper argues that the Turkic auxiliary construction –(İ)p bol–, at least in Uyghur and Uzbek, is actually a pair of auxiliaries with distinct meanings. The first auxiliary is described as expressing “full completion” of the event, but its use is highly restricted, to events with incremental or universally quantified themes. Using targeted context-based elicitation, we find that the expression of completion is indirect. Instead, the auxiliary asserts that the event description is homomorphic, in that all of its events are both event-mapped and theme-mapped. Homomorphism requires every part of the theme to undergo a part of the event, and this derives the reported sense of completion.The second auxiliary is not attested in the literature. It applies to all kinds of events, and expresses what we call “content satisfaction,” the conventional implicature that the event as described satisfies some salient propositional content by rendering it true. For instance, it makes part of a plan come to fruition. This plan is presupposed, and the content is accessible through a content-generating function.We apply the methodologies of formal semantic fieldwork to tease these auxiliaries apart, including scope tests that apply differently to the two auxiliaries. Having distinguished them, we suggest new ways to typologically distinguish Turkic auxiliaries and auxiliaries cross-linguistically.
Highlights
Most research focusing on auxiliaries as a grammatical phenomenon is typological and diachronic in nature, focusing on their path to grammaticalization (Heine 1993; Kuteva 2001; Anderson 2006)
This paper argues that the Turkic auxiliary construction –(İ)p bol, at least in Uyghur and Uzbek, is a pair of auxiliaries with distinct meanings
These studies rely on descriptive research to provide a clear and precise synchronic understanding of what auxiliaries mean and how they function, inasmuch as we can treat them as a single class of objects
Summary
Most research focusing on auxiliaries as a grammatical phenomenon is typological and diachronic in nature, focusing on their path to grammaticalization (Heine 1993; Kuteva 2001; Anderson 2006). These studies rely on descriptive research to provide a clear and precise synchronic understanding of what auxiliaries mean and how they function, inasmuch as we can treat them as a single class of objects. Anderson (2006) finds that auxiliaries can be semantically classified into one of several functional types: Tense-Aspect-Modality, polarity and negation, voice, direction and orientation, and adverbial functions like degree.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.