Türkçede Özne Adılları ve Artgönderim
Authors
Keywords:
Turkish, null subjects, overt pronouns, anaphora resolution, Position of Antecedent Strategy, self-paced reading, sentence completion, psycholinguisticsSynopsis
This book examines how the null subject pronoun and the overt pronoun o are linked to their antecedents in Turkish intra-sentential contexts, across processing, interpretation and production. Four experiments, conducted within project no. 324K597 funded by TÜBİTAK under its 1002 programme, test the Position of Antecedent Strategy (PAS), proposed by Carminati for Italian, against Turkish data. A total of 153 university students who are native speakers of Turkish took part in three self-paced reading experiments with semantic, morphological and no biasing cues, and in a sentence completion experiment. Online reading times showed no significant effect of pronoun type or antecedent type. In the comprehension questions, however, participants strongly preferred the subject antecedent with both pronoun types; the cues weakened this subject bias but did not eliminate it. In production, speakers referred to the subject antecedent mostly with a null pronoun and to the object antecedent mostly with a repeated noun rather than an overt pronoun. The findings show that the null-pronoun component of the PAS holds in Turkish, whereas the overt-pronoun component does not yield the predicted object bias. The book argues that o functions in Turkish less as an anaphoric device than as a discourse-level element, and positions Turkish as an important point of comparison in cross-linguistic research on anaphora resolution.
References
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L. ve Clifton, C. (2002). ‘Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish’. Rivista di Linguistica, 14(2), 151–69.
Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents. Londra: Routledge.
Aydın, Ö. ve İşsever, S. (2013). ‘Anti-subject orientation in Turkish’. I. Özyıldırım, N. Büyükkantarcıoğlu, E. Yarar ve E. Alpaslan (Ed.), 40. Yıl Yazıları 1972–2012 içinde (s. 42–63). Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.
Azar, Z. ve Özyürek, A. (2015). ‘Discourse management: Reference tracking in speech and gesture in Turkish narratives’. Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 222–40. https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.4.2.06aza
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J. ve Bates, D. M. (2008). ‘Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items’. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B. ve Walker, S. (2015). ‘Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4’. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01
Bel, A. ve García-Alcaraz, E. (2015). ‘Subject pronouns in the L2 Spanish of Moroccan Arabic speakers: Evidence from bilingual and second language learners’. T. Judy ve S. Perpiñán (Ed.), The Acquisition of Spanish in Understudied Language Pairings içinde (s. 201–32). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.3.08bel
Bel, A., Sagarra, N., Comínguez, J. P. ve García-Alcaraz, E. (2016). ‘Transfer and proficiency effects in L2 processing of subject anaphora’. Lingua, 184, 134–59.
Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I. ve Sheehan, M. (2010). Parametric Variation: Null Subjects in Minimalist Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511770784
Cardinaletti, A. ve Starke, M. (1999). ‘The typology of structural deficiency: A case study of the three classes of pronouns’. H. van Riemsdijk (Ed.), Clitics in the Languages of Europe içinde (s. 145–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Carminati, M. N. (2002). The Processing of Italian Subject Pronouns. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Chamorro, G. (2018). ‘Offline interpretation of subject pronouns by native speakers of Spanish’. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics, 3(1), 27. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.256
Chamorro, G., Sorace, A. ve Sturt, P. (2016). ‘What is the source of L1 attrition? The effect of recent L1 re-exposure on Spanish speakers under L1 attrition’. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 520–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728915000152
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding: The Pisa Lectures. Dordrecht: Foris.
Contemori, C. ve Di Domenico, E. (2021). ‘Microvariation in the division of labor between null- and overt-subject pronouns: The case of Italian and Spanish’. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(4), 997–1028. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716421000199
Contemori, C. ve Di Domenico, E. (2023). ‘The production of subject anaphoric expressions in Italian and Mexican Spanish: A forced-choice experimental study’. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52(6), 2257–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-09993-w
Çakır, S. ve Çınar, O. (2026). The contextual influences on the pronominal binding preferences in Turkish: A processing-based study [Yayımlanmak üzere gönderilmiş makale].
Çınar, O. (2023). ‘The interpretation of overt subject pronominals in Turkish’. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 34(2), 165–200. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1292056
Çınar, O. (2024). ‘Revisiting native grammar through L2 theories: Knowledge and processing of null and overt subject pronouns in Turkish’. Nesne, 12(33), 331–50. https://doi.org/10.7816/nesne-12-33-03
Çınar, O. (2026). Türkçede Boş ve Açık Özne Adıllarının Artgönderim Çözümlemeleri [Veri seti]. TÜBİTAK Aperta. https://doi.org/10.48623/aperta.287360
Çınar, O. ve Çakır, S. (2019). ‘The universality of the Overt Pronoun Constraint: The re-analysis of the Turkish case’. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 39(4), 463–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1623760
Enç, M. (1986). ‘Topic switching and pronominal subjects in Turkish’. D. I. Slobin ve K. Zimmer (Ed.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics içinde (s. 195–208). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.8.11enc
Erguvanlı-Taylan, E. (1986). ‘Pronominal versus zero representation of anaphora in Turkish’. D. I. Slobin ve K. Zimmer (Ed.), Studies in Turkish Linguistics içinde (s. 209–31). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.8.12tay
Fedele, E. ve Kaiser, E. (2015). ‘Resolving null and overt pronouns in Italian: An experimental investigation of syntax–semantics interactions’. C. Brown, Q. Gu, C. Loos, J. Mielens ve G. Neveu (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th Texas Linguistic Society Conference içinde (s. 53–72). Austin: University of Texas.
Filiaci, F., Sorace, A. ve Carreiras, M. (2014). ‘Anaphoric biases of null and overt subjects in Italian and Spanish: A cross-linguistic comparison’. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(7), 825–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.801502
Garvey, C. ve Caramazza, A. (1974). ‘Implicit causality in verbs’. Linguistic Inquiry, 5(3), 459–64.
Gelormini-Lezama, C. ve Almor, A. (2011). ‘Repeated names, overt pronouns, and null pronouns in Spanish’. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(3), 437–54.
Gernsbacher, M. A. ve Hargreaves, D. (1988). ‘Accessing sentence participants: The advantage of first mention’. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(6), 699–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90016-2
Givón, T. (1983). ‘Topic continuity in discourse: An introduction’. T. Givón (Ed.), Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study içinde (s. 1–42). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gordon, P. C., Grosz, B. J. ve Gilliom, L. A. (1993). ‘Pronouns, names, and the centering of attention in discourse’. Cognitive Science, 17(3), 311–47. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1703_1
Gračanin-Yuksek, M., Lago, S., Şafak, D. F., Demir, O. ve Kırkıcı, B. (2017). ‘The interaction of contextual and syntactic information in the processing of Turkish anaphors’. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 46(6), 1397–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-017-9502-2
Gračanin-Yuksek, M., Lago, S., Şafak, D. F., Demir, O. ve Kırkıcı, B. (2020). ‘The interpretation of syntactically unconstrained anaphors in Turkish heritage speakers’. Second Language Research, 36(4), 475–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319841403
Grice, H. P. (1975). ‘Logic and conversation’. P. Cole ve J. L. Morgan (Ed.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts içinde (s. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K. ve Weinstein, S. (1995). ‘Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse’. Computational Linguistics, 21(2), 203–25.
Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N. ve Zacharski, R. (1993). ‘Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse’. Language, 69(2), 274–307. https://doi.org/10.2307/416535
Gürel, A. (2003). ‘Is the overt pronoun constraint universal? Evidence from L2 Turkish’. J. M. Liceras, H. Zobl ve H. Goodluck (Ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2002) içinde (s. 130–9). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Gürel, A. (2006). ‘L2 acquisition of pragmatic and syntactic constraints in the use of overt and null subject pronouns’. R. Slabakova, S. Montrul ve P. Prévost (Ed.), Inquiries in Linguistic Development: In Honor of Lydia White içinde (s. 259–82). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.133.15gur
Holmberg, A. (2005). ‘Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish’. Linguistic Inquiry, 36(4), 533–64. https://doi.org/10.1162/002438905774464322
Huang, C.-T. J. (1984). ‘On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns’. Linguistic Inquiry, 15(4), 531–74.
Jaeger, T. F. (2008). ‘Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models’. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
Jaeggli, O. ve Safir, K. J. (1989). ‘The null subject parameter and parametric theory’. O. Jaeggli ve K. J. Safir (Ed.), The Null Subject Parameter içinde (s. 1–44). Dordrecht: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2540-3_1
Jegerski, J., VanPatten, B. ve Keating, G. D. (2011). ‘Cross-linguistic variation and the acquisition of pronominal reference in L2 Spanish’. Second Language Research, 27(4), 481–507.
Just, M. A., Carpenter, P. A. ve Woolley, J. D. (1982). ‘Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension’. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111(2), 228–38. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.111.2.228
Kaiser, E. ve Trueswell, J. C. (2008). ‘Interpreting pronouns and demonstratives in Finnish: Evidence for a form-specific approach to reference resolution’. Language and Cognitive Processes, 23(5), 709–48. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960701771220
Keating, G. D., Jegerski, J. ve VanPatten, B. (2016). ‘Online processing of subject pronouns in monolingual and heritage bilingual speakers of Mexican Spanish’. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(1), 36–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000418
Keating, G. D., VanPatten, B. ve Jegerski, J. (2011). ‘Who was walking on the beach? Anaphora resolution in Spanish heritage speakers and adult second language learners’. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 33(2), 193–221.
Kehler, A. (2002). Coherence, Reference, and the Theory of Grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Kehler, A., Kertz, L., Rohde, H. ve Elman, J. L. (2008). ‘Coherence and coreference revisited’. Journal of Semantics, 25(1), 1–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffm018
Kehler, A. ve Rohde, H. (2013). ‘A probabilistic reconciliation of coherence-driven and centering-driven theories of pronoun interpretation’. Theoretical Linguistics, 39(1–2), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2013-0001
Kornfilt, J. (1997). Turkish. Londra: Routledge.
Kornfilt, J. (2001). ‘Local and long-distance reflexives in Turkish’. P. Cole, G. Hermon ve C.-T. J. Huang (Ed.), Long-Distance Reflexives (Syntax and Semantics 33) içinde (s. 197–226). San Diego: Academic Press.
Lenth, R. V. (2023). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means [R paketi]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans
Meral, H. M. (2010). ‘Some notes on Turkish pronominal anaphora’. Turkish Studies, 5(4), 535–63.
Montalbetti, M. (1984). After Binding: On the Interpretation of Pronouns. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Özsoy, A. S. (1992). ‘Türkçe’de eşgönderge örüntüsü’. Dilbilim Araştırmaları, 3, 77–85.
Papadopoulou, D., Peristeri, E., Plemenou, E., Marinis, T. ve Tsimpli, I. (2015). ‘Pronoun ambiguity resolution in Greek: Evidence from monolingual adults and children’. Lingua, 155, 98–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.09.006
R Core Team (2024). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Viyana: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/
Rizzi, L. (1982). Issues in Italian Syntax. Dordrecht: Foris.
Rizzi, L. (1986). ‘Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro’. Linguistic Inquiry, 17(3), 501–57.
de Rocafiguera, N. ve Bel, A. (2022). ‘On the impact of clause order on pronoun resolution: Evidence from Spanish’. Folia Linguistica, 56(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2021-2002
Rothman, J. (2007). ‘Pragmatic solutions for syntactic problems: Understanding some L2 syntactic errors in terms of discourse-pragmatic deficits’. S. Baauw, F. Drijkoningen ve M. Pinto (Ed.), Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2005 içinde (s. 299–320). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Schimke, S. ve Colonna, S. (2016). ‘Native and nonnative interpretation of pronominal forms: Evidence from French and Turkish’. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(1), 131–62. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263115000303
Sezer, F. E. (1991). Issues in Turkish Syntax. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Harvard University.
Sorace, A. ve Filiaci, F. (2006). ‘Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian’. Second Language Research, 22(3), 339–68. https://doi.org/10.1191/0267658306sr271oa
Turan, Ü. D. (1995). Null vs. Overt Subjects in Turkish Discourse: A Centering Analysis. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, University of Pennsylvania.
Wolna, A., Durlik, J. ve Wodniecka, Z. (2022). ‘Pronominal anaphora resolution in Polish: Investigating online sentence interpretation using eye-tracking’. PLOS ONE, 17(1), e0262459. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262459
Zehr, J. ve Schwarz, F. (2018). PennController for Internet Based Experiments (IBEX) [Yazılım]. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MD832
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The raw data, materials and analysis code of the experiments are openly available in TÜBİTAK’s Aperta repository: https://doi.org/10.48623/aperta.287360. All test sentences are given in the appendices of the book.
