Cover not available
Part of
Exploring the Turkish Linguistic Landscape: Essays in honor of Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan
Edited by Mine Güven, Didar Akar, Balkız Öztürk and Meltem Kelepir
[Studies in Language Companion Series 175] 2016
► pp. 81–102

Clause combining in Turkish as a minority language in Germany

ORCID logo | University of Potsdam

As is well known, Turkish is a language which has predominantly non-finite subordination in the domain of clause combining. In addition, Turkish contains a variety of strategies of finite clause combining, and the distribution between finite and non-finite strategies can be related to register differences, with nonfinite structures belonging more to the written register and finite structures more to the spoken register. This paper aims to develop a theoretical understanding of (conceptually) oral versus (conceptually) written language in Turkish, and to use this understanding in order to interpret the dynamics of language shift in the domain of clause combining in Turkish in Germany, that is, in the variety of Turkish which has developed in the minority setting in Germany over the past fifty years. The approach is demonstrated with regard to the use of the connector çünkü “because” in written and spoken Turkish in Turkey and in spoken Turkish in Germany.

Keywords: clause combining, language contact, spoken vs. written language, Turkish in Germany
Published online: 14 June 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.175.06sch
References
Backus, Ad
2003 Can a mixed language be conventionalized alternational codeswitching? In The Mixed Language Debate. Theoretical and Empirical Advances, Yaron Matras & Peter Bakker (eds), 237-270. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bayram, Fatih
2013 Acquisition of Turkish by Heritage Speakers: A Processability Approach. PhD dissertation, Newcastle University.
Berman, Ruth & Verhoeven, Ludo
2002 Developing text-production abilities across, genre and modality. Written Languages and Literacy 5(1): 1-43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1995 Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-linguistic Comparison. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006 University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boeschoten, Hendrik & Broeder, Peter
1999 Zum Interferenzbegriff in seiner Anwendung auf die Zweisprachigkeit türkischer Immigranten. In Türkisch und Deutsch im Vergleich [Turcologica 39], Lars Johanson & Jochen Rehbein (eds), 1-22. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace
1985 Linguistic differences produced by differences between speaking and writing. In Literacy, Language and Learning, David R. Olson, Nancy Torrance & Angela Hildyard (eds), 105-123. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace & Tannen, Deborah
1987 The relation between written and spoken language. Annual Review of Anthropology 16: 383-407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cindark, Ibrahim & Aslan, Sema
2004 Deutschlandtürkisch? Mannheim: Open-Access Publikationsserver des IDS [URL] (3 January 2015).Google Scholar
Dollnick, Meral
2013 Konnektoren in türkischen und deutschen Texten bilingualer Schüler. Eine vergleichende Langzeituntersuchung zur Entwicklung sprachlicher Kompetenzen. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Erguvanlı, Eser Emine
1984 The Function of Word Order in Turkish Grammar. Berkeley CA.: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Erkman-Akerson, Fatma
1993 Türkçede eş işlevli dilbilgisel yapıların kullanım değerleri. (The use of linguistic constructions with parallel functions in Turkish). In VII. Dilbilim Kurultayı bildirileri. 13-14 Mayıs 1993 (Proceedings of the VII. Linguistics Conference), Kâmile İmer & N. Engin Uzun (eds), 95-103. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.Google Scholar
Givón, Talmy
1979 From discourse to syntax: Grammar as a processing strategy. In Discourse and Syntax [Syntax and Semantics 12], Talmy Givón (ed.), 81-111. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Göksel, Aslı & Kerslake, Celia
2005 Turkish. A Comprehensive Grammar[ Comprehensive Grammars]. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herkenrath, Annette
2007 Discourse coordination in Turkish-German bilingual children's talk: işte . In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 5], Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein & Lukas Pietsch (eds.), 291-328. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Wh-Konstruktionen im Türkischen [Turcologica 87]. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
2014 The acquisition of -DIK and its communicative range in monolingual versus bilingual constellations. In Turcology and Linguistics. Éva Ágnes Csató Festschrift, Nurettin Demir, Birsel Karakoç & Astrid Menz (eds), 219-236. Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Yayınları.Google Scholar
Herkenrath, Annette, Karakoç, Birsel & Rehbein, Jochen
2003 Interrogative elements as subordinators in Turkish – aspects of Turkish-German bilingual children’s language use. In (In)Vulnerable Domains in Bilingualism [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 1], Natascha Müller (ed.), 221-270. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinnenkamp, Volker
2005 Semilingualism, double monolingualism and blurred genres – on (not) speaking a legitimate language. Migration. Journal of Social Science Education 1. [URL] (30 January 2015).Google Scholar
Karakoç, Birsel
2007 Connectivity by means of finite elements in monolingual and bilingual Turkish discourse. In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 5], Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein & Lukas Pietsch (eds), 199-227. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keim, Inken
2007 Die "türkischen Powergirls". Lebenswelt und kommunikativer Stil einer Migrantinnengruppe in Mannheim. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Keim, Inken & Cindark, Ibrahim
2003 Deutsch-türkischer Mischcode in einer Migrantinnengruppe: Form von Jugendsprache oder soziolektales Charakteristikum? In Jugendsprache in Spiegel der Zeit, Eva Neuland (ed.) 377-393. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Kerslake, Celia
2007 Alternative subordination strategies in Turkish. In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 5], Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein & Lukas Pietsch (eds), 231-258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koch, Peter & Oesterreicher, Wulf
1994 Schriftlichkeit und Sprache. In Schrift und Schriftlichkeit/Writing and Its Use. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch internationaler Forschung /An Interdisciplinary Handbook of International Research, Hartmut Günther & Otto Ludwig (eds), 587-604. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kornfilt, Jaklin
1997 Turkish [Descriptive Grammars]. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Küppers, Almut, Şimşek, Yazgül & Schroeder, Christoph
2015 Turkish as a minority language in Germany: Aspects of language development and language instruction. Zeitschrift für Fremdsprachenforschung 26(1): 29-51.Google Scholar
Küppers, Almut, Pusch, Barbara & Uyan-Semerci, Pınar
(eds) 2015 Education in Transnational Spaces / Bildung in transnationalen Räumen. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Maas, Utz
2008 Sprache und Sprachen in der Migrationsgesellschaft. Die schriftkulturelle Dimension. Osnabrück: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
2010 Literat und orat. Grundbegriffe der Analyse geschriebener und gesprochener Sprach. Grazer Linguistische Studien 73: 21-150.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron
2007 Contact, connectivity and language evolution. In Connectivity in Grammar and Discourse [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 5], Jochen Rehbein, Christiane Hohenstein & Lukas Pietsch (eds), 51-74. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Menz, Astrid
1991 Studien zum Türkisch der zweiten deutschland-türkischen Generation. Hausarbeit zur Erlangung des Akademischen Grades eines Magister Artium. Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. Ms.
Miller, Jim & Fernandez-West, Jocelyne M.M
2006 Spoken and written language. In Pragmatic Organization of Discourse in the Languages of Europe [EALT/ EUROTYP 20-8], Giuliano Bernini & Marcia L. Schwartz (eds), 9-64. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Onar Valk, Pelin
2015 Transformation in Dutch Turkish Subordination? Converging Evidence of Change Regarding Finiteness and Word Order in Complex Clauses. PhD dissertation, Tilburg University and Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics (LOT).
Ozil, Şeyda
1993 Türkçede eş işlevli dilbilgisel yapılar (Linguistic constructions with parallel functions in Turkish) In VII. Dilbilim Kurultayı bildirileri. 13-14 Mayıs 1993. (Proceedings of the VII. Linguistics Conference), Kâmile İmer & N. Engin Uzun (eds), 85-97. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Levey, Stephen
2010 Contact-induced grammatical change: A cautionary tale. In Language and Space - An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Vol. 1: Theories and Methods, Peter Auer & Jürgen Erich Schmidt (eds), 391-419. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter,Google Scholar
Rehbein, Jochen, Herkenrath, Annette & Karakoç, Birsel
2009 On contact-induced language change of Turkish as an immigrant language. Language Typology and Universals 62(3): 171-204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rehbein, Jochen & Herkenrath, Annette
. Forthcoming 2016 Converbs in monolingual’s and bilingual’s Turkish. In Ankara Papers in Turkish and Turkic Linguistics [Turcologica], Deniz Zeyrek, Çiğdem Sağın-Şimşek, Ufuk Ataş & Jochen Rehbein (eds), 493-573. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Reich, Hans H
2009 Entwicklungswege türkisch-deutscher Zweisprachigkeit. In Erwerb des Türkischen in einsprachigen und mehrsprachigen Situationen, Ursula Neumann & Hans H. Reich (eds), 63-90. Münster: Waxmann.Google Scholar
Sarı, Maksut
2006 Intra-linguistic interference triggered by inter-linguistic interference. In Turkic Languages in Contact [Turcologica 61], Rik Boeschoten & Lars Johanson (eds), 176-185. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Schellhardt, Christin & Schroeder, Christoph
2015a Nominalphrasen in deutschen und türkischen Texten mehrsprachiger Schüler/innen. In Deutsche Grammatik im Kontakt in Schule und Unterricht [Reihe Germanistische Linguistik], Klaus-Michael Köpcke & Arne Ziegler (eds.), 241-261. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds) 2015b MULTILIT – Manual, Criteria of Transcription and Analysis for German, Turkish and English. Potsdam: Publish UP [URL] (27 November 2015).Google Scholar
Schroeder, Christoph
1995 Post-predicate arguments in Turkish. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 48: 204-218.Google Scholar
1999 The Turkish Nominal Phrase in Spoken Discourse [Turcologica 40] Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
2002 On the structure of spoken Turkish. Essener Linguistische Skripte 2(1): 73-90 [URL] (23 October 2015).Google Scholar
Sürig, Inken, Yazgül Şimşek, Christoph Schroeder & Anja Boneß
. Forthcoming 2016 Literacy Acquisition in School in the Context of Migration and Multilingualism: A Binational Survey. [Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism] Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine, Özsoy, A. Sumru & van Hout, Roeland
2006 Oral language proficiency of Turkish-German bilinguals in Germany and Turkey: An analysis of complex embeddings in Turkish picture descriptions. In Turkic Languages in Contact. [Turcologica 61], Rik Boeschoten & Lars Johanson (eds.), 203-219. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Altinkamis, Feyza & Ellen Simon
2020. Language abilities in bilingual children: The effect of family background and language exposure on the development of Turkish and Dutch. International Journal of Bilingualism 24:5-6 ► pp. 931 ff. DOI logo
Goschler, Juliana, Christoph Schroeder & Till Woerfel
2020. Chapter 5. Convergence in the encoding of motion events in heritage Turkish in Germany. In Studies in Turkish as a Heritage Language [Studies in Bilingualism, 60], ► pp. 87 ff. DOI logo
Iefremenko, Kateryna, Christoph Schroeder & Jaklin Kornfilt
2021. Converbs in heritage Turkish: A contrastive approach. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 44:2 ► pp. 130 ff. DOI logo
Wiese, Heike, Artemis Alexiadou, Shanley Allen, Oliver Bunk, Natalia Gagarina, Kateryna Iefremenko, Maria Martynova, Tatiana Pashkova, Vicky Rizou, Christoph Schroeder, Anna Shadrova, Luka Szucsich, Rosemarie Tracy, Wintai Tsehaye, Sabine Zerbian & Yulia Zuban
2022. Heritage Speakers as Part of the Native Language Continuum. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 march 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.