The paper deals with the coding of basic spatial relations in Northeastern Turkic of Siberia-Mongolia and its neighbors. The devices available are taken to represent five successive levels of a “pyramid”, standing for different degrees of semantic accuracy: (A) markerless constructions, (B) simple case suffixes, (C) composite case suffixes, (D) simple postpositions, and (E) composite postpositions. Allegedly simple notions in human spatial cognition, represented by semantic primitives such as ‘in’ and ‘on’ and assumed to be coded directly across languages, are only found at level E. It is suggested that the spatial relators might be dealt with in the framework of an old Transeurasian system, whose devices were eventually replaced by those of more fine-grained contents. Throughout the languages in question, spatial relators tend to get dynamic and non-dynamic interpretations according to the movement character of the predicate verb. This shared pecularity might be explainable in terms of genealogical retention.
2020. Contact-induced change in the languages of Europe: The rise and development of partitive cases and determiners in Finnic and Basque. Linguistics 58:3 ► pp. 869 ff.
Ragagnin, Elisabetta
2020. Major and Minor Turkic Language Islands in Iran with a Special Focus on Khalaj. Iranian Studies 53:3-4 ► pp. 573 ff.
Nikitina, Tatiana
2018. Frames of reference in discourse: Spatial descriptions in Bashkir (Turkic)
. Cognitive Linguistics 29:3 ► pp. 495 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.