The subject of the article is syntactic units, namely “syntagmas” and “constructions” that are rules, programmes or models that determine to construct the units of speech, and is not the material, concrete formations, like “utterances”, “sentences”, “phrases, word-groups” etc. that are observed in the speech.
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article is devoted to the concepts that present the main units of syntactic fragment that is a part of the language system.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this study the language system is to be interpreted as a knowledge consisting of abstract images.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The subject of the article is syntactic units, namely “syntagmas” and “constructions” that are rules, programmes or models that determine to construct the units of speech, and is not the material, concrete formations, like “utterances”, “sentences”, “phrases, word-groups” etc. that are observed in the speech.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:söz dizimi · sentagma · yapı
Abstract
This article is devoted to the concepts that present the main units of syntactic fragment that is a part of the language system. In this study the language system is to be interpreted as a knowledge consisting of abstract images. The subject of the article is syntactic units, namely “syntagmas” and “constructions” that are rules, programmes or models that determine to construct the units of speech, and is not the material, concrete formations, like “utterances”, “sentences”, “phrases, word-groups” etc. that are observed in the speech.
Özet
Bu makale, soyut imgelerden ibaret bir bilme olarak yorumlanan dil dizgesinin bir kısmını
Guzev, V. G., Yılmaz, Ö. D. (2010). İŞLEVSEL TÜRKÇE SÖZ DİZİMİNİN BAZI SAV VE KAVRAMLARI ÜZERİNE. Türk Dili Araştırmaları Yıllığı - Belleten, Cilt: 56 Sayı: 2008/2, 125–143. https://ajindex.com/articles/1096822
Alpatov, V. M. (1998), İstoriya lingvistiçeskih uçeniy. Uçebnoye posobiye, Moskva:Yazıki russkoy kul’turı.
Baudouin de Courtenay, İ. A. (1963), İzbrannıye trudı po obşçemu yazıkoznaniyu,Tom II, Moskva: İzdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR.
Bazin, L. (1959), “Structures et tendances communes des langues turques (Sprachbau)”,Philologiae Turcicae Fundamenta, Tomus Primus, Wiesbaden.
Deniz Yılmaz, Ö. (2006), Kategoriya nominalizatsii deystviya v turetskom yazıke,Sankt-Peterburg: İzdatel’stvo S.-Peterburgskogo universiteta.
Guzev, V. G. (1976), “Sistema imennıh form tyurkskogo glagola kak morfologiçeskayakategoriya (na materiale staroanatoliyskogo i turetskogo yazıkov)”, Turcologica. K semidesyatiletiyu akademika A. N. Kononova, Otvetstvennıye redaktorı S. G.
Klyaştornıy, Yu. A. Petrosyan, E. R. Tenişev, Leningrad: “Nauka”, Leningradskoyeotdeleniye.
_____ (1987), Oçerki po teorii tyurkskogo slovoizmeneniya: imya (na materialestaroanatoliysko-tyurkskogo yazıka), Leningrad: İzdatel’stvo LGU.
_____ (1990), Oçerki po teorii tyurkskogo slovoizmeneniya: glagol (na materialestaroanatoliysko-tyurkskogo yazıka), Leningrad: İzdatel’stvo LGU.
_____ (1993), “O razgraniçenii ponyatiy “finitnaya forma” i “liçnaya forma””,Vostokovedeniye, Otvetstvennıye redaktorı V. G. Guzev, O. B. Frolova, Vıpusk 18, Sank Peterburg.
Guzev, V. G. ve Ö. Deniz Yılmaz (2004), Opıt postroyeniya ponyatiynogo apparatateorii turetskoy grammatiki: Uçebnoye posobiye na turetskom yazıke, İzdatel’stvo S.-Peterburgskogo universiteta.