Turkish nom-acc case-marking optionality
|Submitter Email:||click here to access email|
I just recently read a paper about the dependent accusative case-
marking of object nouns in Turkish language, and I found it
particularly interesting because I was informed that Turkish
case-marking is always present and not optional. Yet, Dr.
Kilicaslan's 2006 paper (A situation-theoretical approach to case
marking semantics in Turkish) suggests otherwise.
I intend to conduct some language-learning research evaluating
transfer effects of case-marking and planned to use Turkish
because we thought its case-marking system was non-optional. For
my experiment that seeks to investigate the role of L1 knowledge
on learning case in a new L2, we need to have a qualitative
estimate of the informativity of case-marking in simple
transitive sentences. That is, we are curious to know a) how
often themes in simple transitive sentences are case-marked
(leaving pronouns aside) and b) how often that case-marking is
unambiguous (i.e. there is no case-syncretism with the nominative
I am very curious and would appreciate if you would kindly reply
to these questions. Any pointers you could provide in this
direction would be much appreciated. Thank you!
Sums main page