Article published In:
Linguistic Variation: Online-First Articles

No-Reversal Constraint and beyond

Word-internal language mixing in Anatolia

ORCID logo | University of Massachusetts Amherst
This study investigates various un(der)studied word-internal language mixing patterns among Turkish, Anatolian Arabic and Northern Kurdish, in the context of both verbal and nominal domains. The examination of these patterns reveals various theoretical implications. First, head-directionality may change as a result of language contact. Second, in some instances, certain functional categories are borrowed as semantically vacuous heads, and are identical to their bare counterparts (cf. Marantz 2013; Anagnostopoulou and Samioti 2014). Therefore, such semantically empty heads are ignored for meaning. Moreover, informed by the rarely-discussed trilingual language-mixing contexts, the study demonstrates that various formal approaches to code-switching which rely on either a distinction between functional vs lexical categories or phasehood as the defining constraint on code-switching are not tenable (e.g., Poplack 1981; Belazi et al. 1994; López et al. 2017). This study demonstrates language mixing is more permissive for the languages in question than would be predicted by these approaches, and proposes the No-Reversal Constraint, whose governing restriction is that code-switching does not allow a switch back to a language that has already been externalized earlier in the derivation.
Keywords: word-internal language mixing, multilingualism, No-Reversal Constraint, code-switching, light verbs, Anatolia
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The sociolinguistic and theoretical background
    • 2.1The linguistic situation and multilingualism
    • 2.2The theoretical background to word-formation
  • 3.Verbal predicate formation
    • 3.1Light verb constructions in Turkish and Northern Kurdish
    • 3.2LVC borrowing between Kurdish-Arabic and Turkish
    • 3.3Patterns of LVC borrowing with -mIş into Kurdish and Arabic
      • 3.3.1 -mIş forms in NK
      • 3.3.2 -mIş forms in Anatolian/Sason Arabic
    • 3.4An analysis of the -mIş patterns
    • 3.5A solely intra-linguistic/structural explanation for the asymmetry?
    • 3.6Section summary
  • 4.The templatic and affixal borrowing
    • 4.1The templatic pattern in the verbal domain
    • 4.2The templatic pattern in the nominal domain
      • 4.2.1Irregular, broken plurals
      • 4.2.2Regular and double plurals
      • 4.2.3Word-internal language-mixing and No-Reversal Constraint
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 March 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.22041.akk
References (96)
References
Aboh, Enoch Oladé. 2015. The emergence of hybrid grammars: Language contact and change. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Akkuş, Faruk. 2014. The Functional Categories and Phrase Structure of Sason Arabic. MA thesis, Boğaziçi University.
. 2015. Light Verb Constructions in Turkish: A Case for DP Predication and Blocking. In Proceedings of the 9th Workshop on Altaic Formal Linguistics (MITWPL 76), ed. Andrew Joseph and Esra Predolac, 133–145. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 2016. The Arabic Dialect of Mutki-Sason Areas. In Arabic Varieties: Far and Wide. Proceedings of the 11th Conference of AIDA, 29–41. Editura Universităţii din Bucuresti.Google Scholar
. 2020. Anatolian Arabic. In Arabic and contact-induced change, ed. Christopher Lucas and Stefano Manfredi, 135–158. Language Science Press.Google Scholar
Akkuş, Faruk, and Elabbas Benmamoun. 2016. Clause Structure in Contact Contexts: the Case of Sason Arabic. Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XXVIII 1 153–172.Google Scholar
. 2018. Syntactic Outcomes of Contact in Sason Arabic. In Arabic in Contact, ed. Manfredi Stefano, Mauro Tosco, and Giorgio Banti, 38–52. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Akkuş, Faruk, David Embick, and Mohammed Salih. 2023. Case and the syntax of argument indexation: An analysis of Sorani Kurdish. Ms., University of Massachusetts Amherst and University of Pennsylvania URL [URL]
Akkuş, Faruk, and Balkız Öztürk. 2017. On cognate objects in Sason Arabic. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 231:2.Google Scholar
Alagozlu, Nuray. 2017. Code-switching between Kabardian and Turkish. Paper presented at the 6th International Symposium on Bilingualism URL [URL]
Alexiadou, Artemis. 2017. Building verbs in language mixing varieties. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 361:165–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Elena Anagnostopoulou, and Florian Schäfer. 2015a. External arguments in transitivity alternations: A layering approach, volume 551. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Terje Lohndal, Tor A. Åfarli, and Maren Berg Grimstad. 2015b. Language mixing: a distributed morphology approach. In Proceedings of NELS 45, ed. Thuy Bui and Deniz Özyıldız, volume 451, 25–38. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Anagnostopoulou, Elena, and Yota Samioti. 2014. Domains within words and their meanings: A case study. In The syntax of roots and the roots of syntax, ed. Artemis Alexiadou, Hagit Borer, and Florian Schäfer, 81–111. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arad, Maya. 2003. Locality constraints on the interpretation of roots: The case of Hebrew denominal verbs. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 211:737–778. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Roots and patterns: Hebrew morpho-syntax. Springer.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter, and Kirill Kozhanov. 2021. Borrowing of Morphology. In The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Morphology, ed. Peter Ackema, Sabrina Bendjaballah, Eulalia Bonet, and Antonio Fábregas. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Armostis, Spyros, and Marilena Karyolemou. 2023. Contact-Induced Change in an Endangered Language: The Case of Cypriot Arabic. Languages 81:10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bağrıaçık, Metin, Angela Ralli, and Dimitra Melissaropoulou. 2015. Borrowing verbs from Oghuz Turkic: two linguistic areas. In Borrowed morphology, ed. Francesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev, and Nino Amiridze, 109–136. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Balam, Osmer, María del Carmen Parafita Couto, and Hans Stadthagen-González. 2020. Bilingual verbs in three spanish/english code-switching communities. International Journal of Bilingualism 241:952–967. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bandi-Rao, Shoba, and Marcel den Dikken. 2014. Light switches. In Grammatical theory and bilingual codeswitching, ed. Jeff MacSwan, 161–184. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Belazi, Hedi M., Edward J. Rubin, and Almeida Jacqueline Toribio. 1994. Code switching and X-bar theory: The functional head constraint. Linguistic Inquiry 221–237.Google Scholar
Benmamoun, Elabbas. 2000. The feature structure of functional categories: A comparative study of Arabic dialects. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biţună, Gabriel. 2016. Morfo-Sintaxa Dialectului Arab Nord-Mesopotamian Din Siirt, Turcia. Doctoral Dissertation, Universitatea din Bucureşti.
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2012. Universals in comparative morphology: Suppletion, superlatives, and the structure of words. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bulut, Christiane. 2006. Turkish elements in spoken Kurmanji. In Turkic languages in contact, ed. Hendrik Boeschoten and Lars Johanson, 95–121. Berlin: Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Çabuk, Sakine. 2019. A note on the contact between Kurmanji Kurdish and Turkish at lexical and morphological level. International Journal of Bilingualism 231:861–864. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chung, Sandra, and William Ladusaw. 2003. Restriction and saturation. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Citko, Barbara. 2014. Phase theory: An introduction. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coetsem, Frans van. 1988. Loan Phonology and the Two Transfer Types in Language Contact. Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. A General and Unified Theory of the Transmission Process in Language Contact. Winter.Google Scholar
Coghill, Eleanor. 2015. Borrowing of verbal derivational morphology between Semitic languages: the case of Arabic verb derivations in Neo-Aramaic. In Borrowed morphology, ed. Francesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev, and Nino Amiridze, 83–108. Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dabir-Moghaddam, Mohammad. 1997. Compound verbs in Persian. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 271:25–59.Google Scholar
Dorleijn, Margreet. 1996. The decay of ergativity in Kurdish. Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, Malcolm, and Penelope Gardner-Chloros. 2007. Compound verbs in codeswitching: Bilinguals making do? International Journal of Bilingualism 111:73–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David. 2004. On the structure of resultative participles in English. Linguistic Inquiry 351:355–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Localism versus globalism in morphology and phonology, volume 601. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Embick, David, and Alec Marantz. 2008. Architecture and blocking. Linguistic Inquiry 391:1–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Folli, Raffaella, Heidi Harley, and Simin Karimi. 2005. Determinants of event type in Persian complex predicates. Lingua 1151:1365–1401. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Göksel, Aslı, and Celia Kerslake. 2005. Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. Routledge.Google Scholar
González-Vilbazo, Kay, and Luis López. 2011. Some properties of light verbs in code-switching. Lingua 1211:832–850. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grigore, George. 2007a. L’arabe parlé à Mardin – monographic d’un parler arabe périphérique. Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti.Google Scholar
. 2007b. L’énoncé non verbal dans l’arabe parlé à Mardin. Romano-Arabica 51–63.Google Scholar
Grimstad, Maren Berg, and Tor A. Åfarli. 2014. Language mixing and exoskeletal theory: A case study of word-internal mixing in American Norwegian. Nordlyd 411:213–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gündoğdu, Songül. 2015. Noun-Verb Complex Predicates In Kurmanji Kurdish. Proceedings of ConSOLE XXIII 279–301.Google Scholar
. 2018. Argument-Adjunct distinction in Kurmanji Kurdish. Doctoral Dissertation, Boğaziçi University. Istanbul.
Gündoğdu, Songül, and Faruk Akkuş. 2022. Syntax of causatives in language contact: Insights from Kurdish and Arabic. In Poster presented at LSA Annual Meeting 2022.Google Scholar
Gürer, Aslı. 2014. Adjectival participles in Turkish. Lingua 1491:166–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haig, Geoffrey. 2007. Grammatical borrowing in Kurdish (Northern group). In Grammatical borrowing and cross-linguistic perspective, ed. Yaron Matras and J. Sekkal, 165–184. Paris, France: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haig, Geoffrey, and Ergin Öpengin. 2014. Kurdish: A critical research overview. Kurdish Studies 21:99–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haig, Geofrey. 2014. East Anatolia as a linguistic area? Conceptual and empirical issues. In Bamberger Orientstudien, ed. Lale Behzadi, Patrick Franke, Geofrey Haig, Christoph Herzog, Birgitt Hofmann, Lorenz Korn, and Susanne Talabardon, 13–36. University of Bamberg Press.Google Scholar
Heine, Bernd, and Motoki Nomachi. 2013. Contact-induced replication: Some diagnostics. In Shared Grammaticalization: With special focus on the Transeurasian languages, ed. Martine Robbeets and Hubert Cuyckens, 67–100. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jastrow, Otto. 2006. Anatolian Arabic. Encyclopedia of Arabic Language and Linguistics 11:87–96.Google Scholar
. 2011. Turkish and Kurdish influences in the Arabic Dialects of Anatolia. Türk Dilleri Araştırmaları 211:83–94.Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 2002. Structural Factors in Turkic Language Contacts. Routledge.Google Scholar
Karimi, Simin. 1997. Persian complex verbs: Idiomatic or compositional. Lexicology-Berlin 31:273–318.Google Scholar
Kerslake, Celia. 1998. Ottoman Turkish. In The Turkic Languages, ed. Lars Johanson and Éva Á. Csató, 174–194. Routledge.Google Scholar
Key, Gregory. 2013. The morphosyntax of the Turkish causative construction. Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arizona.
. 2021. Passive in Turkish: Re-thinking u -syncretism. Manuscript.Google Scholar
Khan, Geoffrey. 2007. North Eastern Neo-Aramaic. In Grammatical borrowing and cross-linguistic perspective, ed. Yaron Matras and J. Sekkal, 197–214. Paris, France: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin. 1997. Turkish. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kramer, Ruth. 2016. A split analysis of plurality: Number in Amharic. Linguistic Inquiry 471:527–559. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lahdo, Ablahad. 2009. The Arabic Dialect of Tillo in the Region of Siirt (south-eastern Turkey). Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.Google Scholar
López, Luis, Artemis Alexiadou, and Tonjes Veenstra. 2017. Code-switching by phase. Languages 21:9. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marantz, Alec. 2013. Locality domains for contextual allomorphy across the interfaces. In Distributed Morphology Today: Morphemes for Morris Halle, ed. Ora Matushansky and Alec Marantz, 95–115. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2009. Language contact. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, John. 1979. Formal problems in semitic phonology and morphology. Doctoral Dissertation, MIT.
. 1981. A prosodic theory of nonconcatenative morphology. Linguistic Inquiry 121:373–418.Google Scholar
Melissaropoulou, Dimitra. 2016. Variation in word formation in situations of language contact: The case of Cappadocian Greek. Language Sciences 551:55–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1997. Media Lengua. In Contact languages: A wider perspective, ed. Sarah Grey Thomason, 365–426. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 2002. Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, Carol, and Janice Jake. 2009. A universal model of code-switching and bilingual language processing and production. In The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Code-switching, ed. B. Bullock and J. A. Toribio, 336–357. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Myler, Neil. 2016. Building and interpreting possession sentences. MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Öpengin, Ergin. 2012. Sociolinguistic situation of Kurdish in Turkey: Sociopolitical factors and language use patterns. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 151–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Öztürk, Balkız. 2005. Case, referentiality and phrase structure. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paparounas, Lefteris, and Faruk Akkuş. 2023. Anaphora and agreement in the Turkish DP: Delimiting binding-through-Agree. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana. 1980. Sometimes I’ll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en español: toward a typology of code-switching. Linguistics 181:581–618. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1981. Syntactic structure and social function of code-switching. In Latino language and communicative behavior, ed. R. P. Durán, 169–184. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, David, and Shana Poplack. 1981. A formal grammar for code-switching. Paper in Linguistics 141:3–45. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Talay, Shabo. 2007. The influence of Turkish, Kurdish and other neighbouring languages on Anatolian Arabic. Romano-Arabica 179–189.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. 2001. Language Contact. An Introduction. Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Toosarvandani, Maziar, and Coppe Van Urk. 2014. Agreement in Zazaki and the nature of nominal concord. Ms., UC-Santa Cruz and MIT.Google Scholar
Tracy, Rosemarie. 2000. Language mixing as a challenge for linguistics. In Crosslinguistic structures in simultaneous bilingualism, ed. Susanne Döpke, 11–36. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trépos, Pierre. 1957. Le pluriel breton. Brest: Emgleo Breiz.Google Scholar
Tucker, Matthew A. 2011. The Morphosyntax of the Arabic Verb: Toward a Unified Syntax-Prosody. In Morphology at Santa Cruz: Papers in Honor of Jorge Hankamer. URL [URL]
Vardakis, Georgios. 2023. Language Contact in the Written Sources of the Corfiot Jews. In Talk Delivered at the 43th Annual Meeting of the Department of Linguistics, School of Philology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki.Google Scholar
Vaux, Bert. 2001. Hemshinli: The Forgotten Black Sea Armenians. Journal of Armenian Studies 61:47–71.Google Scholar
Versteegh, Kees. 1997. The Arabic Language. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Wittrich, Michaela. 2001. Der arabische Dialekt von Ᾱzex, volume 251. Otto Harrassowitz Verlag.Google Scholar
Wohlgemuth, Jan. 2009. A typology of verbal borrowings. De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wood, Jim. 2015. Icelandic morphosyntax and argument structure, volume 901. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. How roots do and don’t constrain the interpretation of voice. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 961:1.Google Scholar
Woodhead, Christine. 1983. Talikizade’s Şehname-i Hümayun: A history of the Ottoman campaign into Hungary 1593–1594. Klaus Schwarz Verlag.Google Scholar
Zabbal, Youri. 2002. The semantics of number in the Arabic number phrase. Master’s thesis, University of Alberta.