Author :
Abstract
1970’lerden günümüze kadar pek çok dilcinin ilgisini çeken ayrıklar, sözdizimsel yapılarına ve içerdikleri ögelere göre sınıflandırılmıştır. Hemen her dilde farklı biçimlerde ortaya çıktıkları gözlemlenen ayrıkların üstlendikleri işlevler ise sınırlı bağlamlar çerçevesinde incelenmiştir. Genellikle dilbilgisi çalışmaları içerisinde bir sınama aracı olarak kullanılan ayrıklar, yabancı dil öğretimi sürecinde de sıklıkla işlevsel açıdan değil, biçimsel açıdan dahil edilmektedir. Diğer bilişsel alanlar ile arasında arakesit içeren ve içermeyen yapılar arasında bir ayrım öneren Arakesit Varsayımı çerçevesinde ayrıklar, birden çok dilsel altdizge ya da çeşitli dilbilgisi modüllerinin bir araya geldiği yapılardır. Bu noktada çalışmamızda sözdizim-söylemedimbilim arakesitinde konumlanan bir ayrık türü olan It-ayrıklarının geç ve güç işlerlik kazandığı görüşünden yola çıkılarak yabancı dil olarak İngilizce öğrenenler için bu yapıların daha etkin bir biçimde öğretilmesi için malzeme tasarlanması amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda öncelikle It-ayrıklarının sözdizimsel ve söylemedimbilimsel özellikleri alanyazında yapılan çalışmalar ekseninde betimlenmiş ve örneklendirilmiş, daha sonra Seçmeci Yöntem’in bütünleşik bir yaklaşım sunması ve öğretim ortamında farklı yabancı dil öğretim yöntemlerini kullanmaya izin vermesi nedeniyle söylemi de içine alan bir öğretim süreci planlandığından bu söylemedimbilimsel özellikler çerçevesinde It-ayrıklarının öğretimine yönelik tasarlanan malzemeler karşılaştırmalı olarak tartışılmıştır.
Keywords
Abstract
Cleft constructions which have taken the attention of linguists since 1970s, have been classified according to their syntactic structures and the items that they have included. The functions undertaken by cleft constructions, which are observed to appear in different forms in almost every language, are examined within the framework of limited contexts. Cleft constructions, which are generally used as a test tool in grammar studies, are often included in the process of foreign language teaching, not in terms of functionality, but in terms of form. In the framework of Interface Hypothesis, which proposes a distinction between structures with and without interfaces with other cognitive domains, clefts are structures in which multiple linguistic subsets or various grammar modules come together. At this point, in our study, it is aimed to design material for teaching English as a foreign language more effectively for the learners of English language, based on the view that It-clefts, which is a discrete type located at the syntax-discoursepragmatics interface, have late and difficult to operate. In accordance with this aim, first It-clefts’ syntactic and discoursepragmatics features have been identified and exemplified in line with the studies in literature; afterwards, as Eclectic Method has offered an integrated approach and allows different language teaching methods to be used in the teaching environment, a teaching process that includes discourse is planned, and materials designed for the teaching of It-clefts within the framework of these discoursepragmatics features have been discussed comparatively.
Keywords
- Abels, K. ve Muriungi. P. (2005). The focus particle in Kîîtharaka: Syntax and semantics. Lingua. 118 (5): 687-731.
- Akmajian, A. (1970). On deriving cleft sentences from pseudo-cleft sentences. Linguistic Inquiry. 1(2): 147-168.
- Belletti, A. (2009). Structures and strategies (Answering strategies: New information subjects and the nature of clefts, chapter 10). New York: Routledge.
- Belletti, A. (2012). Revisting the CP of clefts. In Ede Zimmermann & Günther Grewendorf (eds.), Discourse and Grammar. From Sentence Types to Lexical Categories (ss. 91-114). (Studies in Generative Grammar 112). Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.
- Belletti, A. (2015). The focus map of clefts: extraposition and predication. Beyond functional sequence, the cartography of syntactic structures (ss. 42-59). Editör Ur Shlonsky. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Belletti, A., Bennati, E. ve Sorace, A. (2007). Theoretical and developmental issues in the syntax of subjects: evidence from Near-Native Italian. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 25(4): 657-689.
- Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S. ve Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Londra: Longman.
- Chomsky, N. (1977). On Wh-movement. formal syntax (ss. 71-132). Editörler Peter W. Culicover, Thomas Wasow ve Adrian Akmajian. New York: Academic Press.
- Collins, P. C. (1991). Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English. Londra: Routledge.
- Collins, P. C. (2002). Cleft and pseudo-cleft constructions in English. Londra: Routledge.
- Delin, J. ve Oberlander, J. (1995). Syntactic constraints on discourse structure: the case of it-clefts. Linguistics: An Interdisciplinary Journal of the Language Sciences. 33(3): 465-500.
- den Dikken, M. (2009). Predication and specification in the syntax of cleft sentences. (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi). New York: City University of New York.
- Dékány, É. (2010). The English cleft-construction: it-clefts. The Odd Yearbook 8(ss. 39-78). Editör Márton Sóskuthy. Budapeşte: Eötvös Loránd University.
- Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings.International Journal of Applied Linguistics.19, 221–246.
- Gillingham, G. (2007). Not every implicature is computed by default: investigations into the effect of linguistic context on the rate of computation of scalar implicature. (Yayınlanmamış Onur Tezi). Montreal: McGill University.
- Haegeman, L. ve Meinunger, A. (2012). The syntax of it-clefts and the left periphery of the clause. ms. UGhent/ZAS Berlin.
- Hankamer, J. (1974). On the Non-Cyclic nature of Wh-clefting. Proceedings of the Tenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (ss. 221-233). Düzenleyen Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, 19-21 Nisan 1974.
- Harries, H. (1972). The role of cleft sentences in the formation of question and answers: some evidence from German. Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (ss. 124-138). Düzenleyen Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago, 14-16 Nisan 1972.
- Hedberg, N. (2013). Multiple focus and cleft sentences. Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today (Cleft Structures). 208: 227-250.
- Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Jespersen, O. (1928, 1965). A modern English grammar on historical principles III. Londra: Allen and Unwin.
- Johansson, M. (2002). Clefts in English and Swedish: A Contrastive Study of It-Clefts and Wh-Clefts in Original Texts and Translations. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Lund: Lund University.
- Oberlander, J. ve Delin, J. (1995). The function and interpretation of reverse wh-clefts in spoken discourse. Language and Speech, 39, 2-3. (ss. 185–227).
- Kiss, É. K. (1998). Identificational focus versus information focus. Language. 74(2): 883- 906.
- Lahousse, K. ve Borremans, M. (2014). The distribution of functional types of clefts in adverbial clauses. Linguistics. 52(3): 793-836.
- Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form: topic, focus and mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Lambrecht, K. (1999). Why languages have cleft constructions. Unpublished colloquium abstract, University of Texas at Austin.
- Lambrecht, K. (2001). A framework for the analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics. 39(3): 463-516.
- Lieberman, M. (2009). Necessary interpretation at the syntax/pragmatics interface: L2 acquisition of scalar implicatures. Paper presented at the workshop on Mind Context Divide: Language Acquisition and Interfaces of Cognitive Linguistic Modules. University of Iowa.
- Perpinan, S. (2014). Locatives and existentials in L2 Spanish: The acquisition of the semantic contrasts among ser, estar and haber. Second Language Research. 30(4): 485-513.
- Prince, E. F. (1978). A comparison of it-clefts and Wh-clefts in discourse. Language. 54(4): 883-906.
- Ramchand, G. ve Reiss, C. (2007). The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Rothman, J. ve Slabakova, R. (2011). The mind-context divide: On acquisition at the linguistic interfaces. Lingua. 121(4): 568-576.
- Slabakova, R. (2007). Scalar implicatures in L2 acquisition. Proceedings of the 31st Annual BUCLD (ss. 576-584). Editörler Heather Caunt-Nulton, Samantha Kulatilake ve Ihao Woo. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
- Slabakova, R. (2009). Scalar implicatures in second language acquisition. Lingua.
- Sorace, A. (2005). Selective optionality in language development. Syntax and Variation: Reconciling the Biological and the Social (ss. 55-80). Editörler Karen P. Corrigan ve Leonie Cornips. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
- Sorace, A. (2011). Pinning down the concept of ‘interface’ in bilingualism. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. 1(1): 1-33.
- Sorace, A. ve Filiaci, F. (2006). Anaphora resolution in near-native speakers of Italian. Second Language Research. 22 (3): 339-368.
- Sorace, A. ve Serratrice, L. (2009). Internal and external interfaces in bilingual language development: beyond structural overlap. International Journal of Bilingualism.
- Tsimpli, I. M. ve Sorace, A. (2006). Differentiating interfaces: L2 performance in syntax- semantics and syntax-discourse phenomena. Proceedings of the Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development. 30 (1): 653-664.
- White, L. (2008a). Definiteness effects in the L2 English of Mandarin and Turkish speakers. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (ss. 550-561). Editörler Harvey Chan, Heather Jacob ve Enkeleida Kapia. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
- White, L. (2008b). Some puzzling features of L2 features. The Role of Features in Second Language Acquisition (ss. 301-326). Editörler Juana Liceras, Helmut Zobl ve Helen Goodluck. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- White, L. (2009). Grammatical theory: interfaces and L2 knowledge. The New Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (ss. 49-65). Editörler William C. Ritchie ve Tej Bhatia. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
- White, L. (2011a). Second language acquisition at the interfaces. Lingua. 121(4): 577-590.
- White, L. (2011b). The interface hypothesis: how far does it extend? Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism. 1(1): 108-110.
- Yin, B. ve Kaiser, E. (2013). Second language learners’ knowledge of syntax in the acquisition of aspectual semantics. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences.
- Yuan, B. (2008). Discrepancy in English speakers’ L2 acquisition of Chinese Wh-words as existential polarity words: the L1-dependent interface hypothesis. Proceedings of the 9th Generative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition Conference (GASLA 2007)(ss. 272-284). Editörler Roumyana Slabakova, Jason Rothman, Paula Kempchinsky ve Elena Gavruseva. Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
- Yuan, B. (2010). Domain-wide or variable-dependent vulnerability of the semantics- syntax interface in L2 acquisition? Evidence from Wh-words used as existential polarity words in L2 Chinese grammars. Second Language Research. 26(2):219260.
