Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive
This paper deals with the analyses of medieval Arab grammarians of passive and resultative verbs in Turkic. In Arabic grammatical theory, certain forms are correlated with unique meanings. In Arabic there are basically two types of passives: first, an internal apophonic passive, indicated by a vowel...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Société d’histoire et d’épistémologie des sciences du langage
2020-12-01
|
| Series: | Histoire Épistémologie Langage |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://journals.openedition.org/hel/520 |
| _version_ | 1798028346871775232 |
|---|---|
| author | Robert Ermers |
| author_facet | Robert Ermers |
| author_sort | Robert Ermers |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This paper deals with the analyses of medieval Arab grammarians of passive and resultative verbs in Turkic. In Arabic grammatical theory, certain forms are correlated with unique meanings. In Arabic there are basically two types of passives: first, an internal apophonic passive, indicated by a vowel shift within the verbal root, e.g. /faʿila/ → /fuʿila/; secondly, a passive indicated by the prefix in- attached to the root, i.e. Form VII, which results in the infinitive pattern infiʿāl —yet verbal forms construed according to the VII paradigm are in addition often interpreted as resultative verbs. In Turkic, verbs can be passivized by adding an -Vl- to the verbal stem (under some criteria this is -Vn-), e.g. ʾur- ‘hit’ → ʾur-ul- ‘be hit’; the Turkish -Vn- form also expresses the reflexive form, e.g. ʾur-un- ‘hit oneself’. In addition, other suffixes may indicate passivization. This poses problems for the grammarians, which they tackle in similar but also very distinct ways: the distinctions between the two passive forms in Arabic, the missing resultative in Turkic, the passive in Turkic, the notion of stem in Turkic versus root in Arabic theory, the position of the inserted element, the criteria according to which the Turkic passive form is not -Vl- but instead -Vn-, to name but a few. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-11T19:06:24Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7b7872cbce414db79f6856bfb39dcee6 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0750-8069 1638-1580 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-11T19:06:24Z |
| publishDate | 2020-12-01 |
| publisher | Société d’histoire et d’épistémologie des sciences du langage |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Histoire Épistémologie Langage |
| spelling | doaj.art-7b7872cbce414db79f6856bfb39dcee62022-12-22T04:07:46ZengSociété d’histoire et d’épistémologie des sciences du langageHistoire Épistémologie Langage0750-80691638-15802020-12-01421739210.4000/hel.520Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passiveRobert ErmersThis paper deals with the analyses of medieval Arab grammarians of passive and resultative verbs in Turkic. In Arabic grammatical theory, certain forms are correlated with unique meanings. In Arabic there are basically two types of passives: first, an internal apophonic passive, indicated by a vowel shift within the verbal root, e.g. /faʿila/ → /fuʿila/; secondly, a passive indicated by the prefix in- attached to the root, i.e. Form VII, which results in the infinitive pattern infiʿāl —yet verbal forms construed according to the VII paradigm are in addition often interpreted as resultative verbs. In Turkic, verbs can be passivized by adding an -Vl- to the verbal stem (under some criteria this is -Vn-), e.g. ʾur- ‘hit’ → ʾur-ul- ‘be hit’; the Turkish -Vn- form also expresses the reflexive form, e.g. ʾur-un- ‘hit oneself’. In addition, other suffixes may indicate passivization. This poses problems for the grammarians, which they tackle in similar but also very distinct ways: the distinctions between the two passive forms in Arabic, the missing resultative in Turkic, the passive in Turkic, the notion of stem in Turkic versus root in Arabic theory, the position of the inserted element, the criteria according to which the Turkic passive form is not -Vl- but instead -Vn-, to name but a few.http://journals.openedition.org/hel/520ʾAbū Ḥayyān al-AndalusīAl-Tuḥfa al-Zakiyya fī l-Luġa al-TurkiyyaArabic grammatical theoryIbn al-MuhannāKitāb al-Qawānīn li-Ḍabṭ al-Luġa al-TurkiyyaMaḥmūd al-Kāšġarī |
| spellingShingle | Robert Ermers Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive Histoire Épistémologie Langage ʾAbū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī Al-Tuḥfa al-Zakiyya fī l-Luġa al-Turkiyya Arabic grammatical theory Ibn al-Muhannā Kitāb al-Qawānīn li-Ḍabṭ al-Luġa al-Turkiyya Maḥmūd al-Kāšġarī |
| title | Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive |
| title_full | Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive |
| title_fullStr | Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive |
| title_full_unstemmed | Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive |
| title_short | Turkic morphology seen by the Arabic grammarians. The passive |
| title_sort | turkic morphology seen by the arabic grammarians the passive |
| topic | ʾAbū Ḥayyān al-Andalusī Al-Tuḥfa al-Zakiyya fī l-Luġa al-Turkiyya Arabic grammatical theory Ibn al-Muhannā Kitāb al-Qawānīn li-Ḍabṭ al-Luġa al-Turkiyya Maḥmūd al-Kāšġarī |
| url | http://journals.openedition.org/hel/520 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT robertermers turkicmorphologyseenbythearabicgrammariansthepassive |