Language |
|
|
|
advanced grammar question
|
1. |
15 Aug 2013 Thu 08:30 pm |
My actual question is: what is the lexical category of the underlined word in the third sentence (sürece)? Adverb or sth else?
|
|
2. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 01:14 am |
I would say it is a subordinating conjunction.
|
|
3. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 03:27 am |
My actual question is: what is the lexical category of the underlined word in the third sentence (sürece)? Adverb or sth else?
Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri sürece is adverb complement. You cant seperate them.
Edited (8/16/2013) by gokuyum
|
|
4. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 08:20 am |
Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri sürece is adverb complement. You cant seperate them.
Hmm I checked what an adverb complement is here.
I think it´s adverbial clause.
-diğim/-diğin/diği/etc. sürece is listed as a "zarffiil" (approximate English term for it is gerundive) suffix which gives the meaning "as/so long as ...".
Yaşadığım sürece ... = As long as I live, ...
Ben yaşadıkça ... = As long as I live, ...
Ölmediğim sürece ... = So long as I don´t die, ...
Ben ölmedikçe ... = So long as I don´t die, ...
|
|
5. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 08:46 am |
Yes that wholeness is an adverbial phrase in that sentence. But we can go further in specifying its constituents until single morpheme level. There is even an embedded sentence inside that phrase!
And the question was what is the function of sürece (as a part of that phrase of course). Or alternatively, why is sürece not like güzelce in sentence II?
Edited (8/16/2013) by Abla
|
|
6. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 10:18 am |
I looked for a translation for "zarf tümleci" but I couldnt find a one. So I translated it that way. I hate grammar terms
|
|
7. |
16 Aug 2013 Fri 12:40 pm |
Yes that wholeness is an adverbial phrase in that sentence. But we can go further in specifying its constituents until single morpheme level. There is even an embedded sentence inside that phrase!
And the question was what is the function of sürece (as a part of that phrase of course). Or alternatively, why is sürece not like güzelce in sentence II?
"sürece" should always goes with "-diği". It doesn´t have any usage without it (at least I cannot think of any). If anyone can find anything otherwise let me know.
Addition:
Also we have "-ceği sürece" in parallel with "-diği sürece" but that should be it. If you google to find somthing you shouldn´t be confused with "sürec-e" (süreç=process sürece=to the process).
So correct question should ask about -diği sürece as a whole.
Edited (8/16/2013) by si++
[Addition]
|
|
8. |
18 Aug 2013 Sun 11:47 am |
This was a question in the YGS exam which is the higher education examination in Turkey. In the exam I first thought that "sürece" was an adverb. But I certainly know that çocukça and genişçe are both adjectives so the answer is "I and V".
I just couldn´t figure out why "sürece" and "güzelce" are not the same. The answer is "I and V" so that means "sürece" cannot be an adverb according to the question. Can we say "-diği sürece" is an adverbial clause or "Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri sürece" is an adverbial clause as a whole? Can´t we talk about the function of "sürece" as a single word?
Edited (8/18/2013) by srhat
|
|
9. |
18 Aug 2013 Sun 12:01 pm |
I and V is correct as you say. Because they are both adjectives. As you can see they describe a noun comes after them.
II is adverb becuse it describes the verb (dinlemek) not a noun.
III is part of a adverbal phrase.
IV is a noun.
|
|
10. |
18 Aug 2013 Sun 04:36 pm |
Can´t we talk about the function of "sürece" as a single word?
sürece is a conjunction which is typically used for creating adverbial clauses. (If you translated that sentence into English there would also be a subordinating conjunction like until in the sentence - in the Turkish sentence DIK represents that subordination.)
If it was için everyone would say it is a conjunction.
|
|
11. |
18 Aug 2013 Sun 06:07 pm |
sürece is a conjunction which is typically used for creating adverbial clauses. (If you translated that sentence into English there would also be a subordinating conjunction like until in the sentence - in the Turkish sentence DIK represents that subordination.)
If it was için everyone would say it is a conjunction.
I have checked again what a conjuction is: here
I don´t think "sürece" is conjunction here. I cannot see the bits connected by it. As I said earlier, it is not used without -diği suffix. It doesn´t connect 2 words, sentences, phrases or clauses. It´s a part of a clause which functions as adverb.
-ce suffix can be used to make adverbs of time and measure
2 gün boyun-ca = for (a period of) 2 days
2 km boyun-ca = along (a way of) 2 kms
günler-ce = for (some) days
metreler-ce = along (many) meters
süre=period
with -diği; it is modified by adjective clauses:
yaşa-dığım süre = the period I have lived (so far)
The clause is treated as a unit and -ce suffix is added with the above mentined meaning:
yaşa-dığım süre-ce = for the period (or as long as) I have lived (so far)
subclause can be longer still it should be treated as a unit:
köyde yoksulluk içinde yaşa-dığım süre-ce = for/during the period (or as long as) I lived in poverty in the village
As a whole, it´s an adverb so it is adverbial clause.
|
|
12. |
18 Aug 2013 Sun 06:29 pm |
I don´t think "sürece" is conjunction here. I cannot see the bits connected by it.
Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri sürece iyi bir proje hazırlamaları imkansız görünüyor.
The bits connected by sürece are
"Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemiyorlar"
AND
"iyi bir proje hazırlamaları imkansız görünüyor".
Two sentences, the first one is subordinate to the other (and thus marked with DIK). What defines its syntactic and semantic position in accordance with the main clause is the conjunction sürece.
It changes into an adverbial clause, yes yes, but the inner structure of the clause is this.
süre=period
with -diği; it is modified by adjective clauses:
yaşa-dığım süre = the period I have lived (so far)
The clause is treated as a unit and -ce suffix is added with the above mentined meaning:
yaşa-dığım süre-ce = for the period (or as long as) I have lived (so far)
Makes very much sense. Probably this is how it came into being.
Edited (8/18/2013) by Abla
|
|
14. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 07:02 am |
They only say so. I have provided some analysis above. If you point out anything wrong with it maybe we can further talk about it.
|
|
15. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 07:41 am |
They only say so. I have provided some analysis above. If you point out anything wrong with it maybe we can further talk about it.
I am too old for such an argument. I can only copy and paste
Edited (8/19/2013) by gokuyum
|
|
16. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 01:07 pm |
I am too old for such an argument.
I love such arguments.
|
|
17. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 10:15 pm |
why we use to say I am too old for something and never I am too young for this...
|
|
18. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 10:21 pm |
why we use to say I am too old for something and never I am too young for this...
I am too young to drive a car.
|
|
19. |
19 Aug 2013 Mon 11:00 pm |
why we use to say I am too old for something and never I am too young for this...
I am too young to die.
|
|
21. |
20 Aug 2013 Tue 07:31 am |
ah be lan
|
|
22. |
21 Aug 2013 Wed 03:04 pm |
the advancedness of this question was so intense it blew my mind
|
|
23. |
21 Aug 2013 Wed 03:58 pm |
thinking of "sürece" as an adverb makes sense, but what doesn´t make sense is: "if sürece is an adverb, why the correct answer for this question is ´I and V´ but not ´II and III´ ?"
Also there is something more that I can´t figure out. We are taught that "-ce suffix" (eşitlik eki) is a "çekim eki" (inflectional suffix). We say that çocukça and genişçe are adjectives, but if -ce suffix is a "çekim eki", they can´t be adjectives, they must remain as nouns, right?
|
|
24. |
21 Aug 2013 Wed 05:31 pm |
thinking of "sürece" as an adverb makes sense, but what doesn´t make sense is: "if sürece is an adverb, why the correct answer for this question is ´I and V´ but not ´II and III´ ?" Well I explained twice how I see it but you guys think I understand nothing and that is completely ok.
Also there is something more that I can´t figure out. We are taught that "-ce suffix" (eşitlik eki) is a "çekim eki" (inflectional suffix). We say that çocukça and genişçe are adjectives, but if -ce suffix is a "çekim eki", they can´t be adjectives, they must remain as nouns, right? CE is not an inflectional but a derivational suffix. It makes adverbs (or adjectives of course) from nouns.
|
|
25. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 11:47 am |
I looked for a translation for "zarf tümleci" but I couldnt find a one. So I translated it that way. I hate grammar terms
Me too! Some of these threads are getting like a PhD in philology.
|
|
26. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 12:03 pm |
My actual question is: what is the lexical category of the underlined word in the third sentence (sürece)? Adverb or sth else?
Sadly, I went to school during a period when the fashion for teaching English was not only "no conjugating of sentences" but also a real dumbing down so that verbs were "doing words", adjectives "describing words" and that was about it. However, it hasn´t stopped me learning fluent Turkish. I find the best way is to understand how the word is being used in the sentence:
1. Çocukça = childish. Well all loved him/her, despite his/her childish actions.
2. Güzelce = well/nicely. Listen well to what I have to say, then after that you can start work.
3. Sürece = while/during/all the time/ as long as.
Lit: It seems impossible for them to prepare a good project while they do not study earlier exercises.
Free: It is impossible for them to prepare a good project without studying/ unless they study earlier exercises.
4. Japonca = Japanese. The difficulty of the alphabet is a factor that makes Japanese so hard to learn.
5. Genişçe = wide/fairly wide. S/he prepared a fairly wide report on the subject and brought it to us.
|
|
27. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 04:05 pm |
thinking of "sürece" as an adverb makes sense, but what doesn´t make sense is: "if sürece is an adverb, why the correct answer for this question is ´I and V´ but not ´II and III´ ?" Well I explained twice how I see it but you guys think I understand nothing and that is completely ok.
Also there is something more that I can´t figure out. We are taught that "-ce suffix" (eşitlik eki) is a "çekim eki" (inflectional suffix). We say that çocukça and genişçe are adjectives, but if -ce suffix is a "çekim eki", they can´t be adjectives, they must remain as nouns, right? CE is not an inflectional but a derivational suffix. It makes adverbs (or adjectives of course) from nouns.
Sorry Abla, I don´t think you understand nothing, it is just I don´t know much grammatical terms in English and that makes me unable to participate in the conversation that much.
You think sürece is a conjunction (correct me if I am wrong). If conjunction means "bağlaç", I think sürece is not a conjunction because conjunctions connect two different sentences or two elements which have the same function. But "İyi bir proje hazırlamaları imkansız görünüyor" is a sentence but "Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri" is not.
"için" is just like "sürece". And "için" is not a conjunction as well. I checked TDK dictionary and it says "için" is an edat (look here). [by the way, honestly I don´t know exactly differences between edat and bağlaç. I can´t understand why "de/da" is considered as bağlaç but not edat.]
"-ce" being a derivational suffix is certainly more logical. But according to curriculum "-ce" is called as "eşitlik eki" and it is an iflectional suffix and I think there is something wrong with that It is categorized under "İsim çekim ekleri" but they say it can change the function of a word.
Edited (8/22/2013) by srhat
|
|
28. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 04:15 pm |
I believe there is a confusion about -ce suffix.
Firstly there are more than one -ce suffixes in Turkish (with same form but different function/stress). It has been covered many times here.
You can find many such topics using search box but this one seems good to me:
http://www.turkishclass.com/forumTitle_44592
|
|
29. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 04:22 pm |
honestly I don´t know exactly differences between edat and bağlaç. I can´t understand why "de/da" is considered as bağlaç but not edat.
Edat=preposition/postposition
Bağlaç=conjuction
Edat examples:
Benim için = For me
Benim ile = With me
Bağlaç examples:
Sen ve ben = You and I
Geldi de gidebildik = He (finally) came and/so we could leave
As you can see above "de" connects 2 sentences.
|
|
30. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 05:21 pm |
Conjunctions are of three kinds, coordinating, subordinating and correlative.
1. Coordinating conjunctions connect two pieces of language of equal syntactic importance.
Geldi ve gidebildik. (MAIN CLAUSE + MAIN CLAUSE)
My guess is this is just about what bağlaç means.
2. Subordinating conjunctions connect two pieces of language. One of them governs the other one syntactically.
Hasta olduğu için eve gelecek. (SUBCLAUSE/ADVERBIAL + MAIN CLAUSE)
This is edat. The same word also has a postposition use when seen together with a noun phrase.
3. Correlative conjunctions work in pairs to join pieces of language of equal value.
Ne çalışır ne çalıştırır. (MAIN CLAUSE + MAIN CLAUSE)
Our original example is of the type 2, SUBCLAUSE/ADVERBIAL + MAIN CLAUSE.
Daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri sürece iyi bir proje hazırlamaları imkansız görünüyor.
And yes daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri is a sentence, why not? There is a subject and a predicate, and even an object. But it is a subordinated (embedded) sentence. The marking of subordination in Turkish is DIK. You can make any sentence a constituent of another sentence (here adverbial) after you have marked it with DIK.
Two sentences are connected with a conjunction, one of the sentences syntactically governs the other.
Edited (8/22/2013) by Abla
|
|
31. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 05:22 pm |
Thanks si++. "De" connects two sentences in "geldi de gidebildik", but what about these: "Ben de geldim." "İkimiz de buradayız." In these sentences "de" doesn´t connect anything. This is what confuses me
And Abla, I am reading your message now
Edited (8/22/2013) by srhat
|
|
32. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 05:48 pm |
Thanks si++. "De" connects two sentences in "geldi de gidebildik", but what about these: "Ben de geldim." "İkimiz de buradayız." In these sentences "de" doesn´t connect anything. This is what confuses me
And Abla, I am reading your message now
You are right. In your example "de" is not a conjuction but a postposition.
The same thing, you can observe with "ile":
Ali ile Veli = Ali and Veli (ile is conjunction)
Ali ile konuştum = I talked with Ali (ile is postposition)
|
|
33. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 06:17 pm |
I see what you mean Abla. "Subordination conjunction" now makes sense. I didn´t agree with you at first because I think in Turkish grammatical terminology and you think in international (or English) grammatical terminology. Turkish definition of bağlaç (conjunction) does not include "subordinating conjunction" so that is causing some trouble here.
I see that linguistic definitions are not standart between English and Turkish, and that is causing some problems here.
I say "daha önceki çalışmaları incelemedikleri" is not a sentence because there is no predicate here. "incele-" is a verb stem but "incelemedikleri" is not a verb, it is eylemsi (i guess it is called verbal in english). What you call subordinated sentence is called "yan cümle" in Turkish and they are not counted as a sentence
That question I asked, is required to be answered using Turkish grammatical rules taught at high schools. Turkish grammatical terminology seems to be conflicting with international terminology
|
|
34. |
22 Aug 2013 Thu 11:04 pm |
Turkish grammatical terminology seems to be conflicting with international terminology
Of course - every language has its specialities - but when you try to look deep enough you begin to see the similarities also.
|
|
|