GRAMMAR AND INFORMATION: A STUDY OF TURKISH INDEFINITES A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF INFORMATICS OF THE MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY UMUT OZGE¨ IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF COGNITIVE SCIENCE SEPTEMBER 2010 Approval of the Graduate School of Informatics Prof. Dr. Nazife Baykal Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Deniz Zeyrek Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cem Bozs¸ahin Supervisor Examining Committee Members: Prof. Dr. Deniz Zeyrek (METU) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cem Bozs¸ahin (METU) Prof. Dr. Varol Akman (Bilkent Unv.) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Aslı Goksel¨ (Bogazici Unv.) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Umit¨ Deniz Turan (Anadolu Unv.) I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name : Umut Ozge¨ Signature : iii ABSTRACT GRAMMAR AND INFORMATION: A STUDY OF TURKISH INDEFINITES Ozge,¨ Umut Ph.D., Department of Cognitive Science Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cem Bozs¸ahin September 2010, 173 pages Turkish, along with many other languages, marks its direct objects in two distinct ways: overt accusative marking (Acc) versus no marking (;). The research on the grammar and interpretation of Turkish indefinite descriptions has focused on the effects of this distinc- tion in case-marking on the interpretation of indefinite noun phrases. The overt accusative marker has been associated with discourse-linking (Nilsson 1985; Enc¸1991; Zidani-Eroglu˘ 1997), specificity (von Heusinger 2002; von Heusinger and Kornfilt 2005), presupposition- ality (Kennelly 1997; Kelepir 2001), individuation/particularization (Nilsson 1985; Taylan and Zimmer 1994; Bolgun¨ 2005; Kılıc¸aslan 2006), and totality/delimitedness (Nilsson 1985; Nakipoglu˘ 2009). The common denominator of these proposals is that each draws a direct correlation between the accusative marker and a semantic or pragmatic category. The thesis argues that such direct associations are either too specific to receive full empirical support, or are too general to possess significant explanatory force. Instead, the thesis tries to come up with an account where the contribution of the accusative marker is minimized to create room for extra-grammatical resources to play explanatory roles. On the empirical side, we review and provide Turkish data that do not conform to the anal- yses of the accusative case as a specificity marker or as an existential presupposition trigger. iv The cases problematic for these proposals come from the interaction of accusative marked indefinites with various intensional operators. In an excursion to a closely related domain, we provide data and argumentation that challenge the tenability of a purely grammatically determined pattern of “neutral” intonation. Our discussion reveals that some information- theoretic concerns are effective in determining the “neutral” intonation of an utterance. We use these observations in clarifying the discourse-linking function attributed to the accusative marker. On the theoretical side, we search for a grammatical basis which not only gives rise to the interpretive effects attributed to the accusative marker, but also explains why certain types of noun phrases obligatorily receive the accusative marker in Turkish. On the basis of data from coordinating conjunctions, we argue that a “semantic incorporation” account that construes the difference between overt Acc versus ;-marking as a type difference is not adequate in explaining the relevant Turkish facts. Instead, we propose to base the difference between Acc-marking versus ;-marking on the distinction between properties and kinds. We take ;-marked indefinites as existential quantifiers over instances of kinds that are licensed under string adjacency. We treat Acc-marked indefinites as referential objects based on contextually restricted properties, which are modeled as generalized Skolem terms (Steedman 2010). We show how the proposed distinction captures the empirical facts reviewed in the thesis. Keywords: Indefinite Noun Phrases, Turkish, Specificity, Discourse-linking, Focus, Combi- natory Categorial Grammar v OZ¨ DILB˙ ILG˙ IS˙ I˙ VE BILG˙ I:˙ TURKC¸E¨ BELIRS˙ IZ˙ AD OBEKLER¨ I˙ UZER¨ INE˙ BIR C¸ALIS¸MA Ozge,¨ Umut Doktora, Bilis¸sel Bilimler Bol¨ um¨ u¨ Tez Yoneticisi:¨ Doc¸. Dr. Cem Bozs¸ahin Eylul¨ 2010, 173 sayfa Turkc¸e,¨ diger˘ birc¸ok dil gibi, dolaysız tumlec¸leri¨ iki farklı bic¸imde belirtmektedir: ac¸ık belirtme durumu (Acc) ve sıfır sesbirim (;). Turkc¸e¨ belirsiz ad obeklerinin¨ dilbilgisel ve anlambilimsel ozellikleri¨ uzerine¨ yapılan aras¸tırmalar, durum eklerindeki bu farklılıgın˘ an- lamlandırma uzerindeki¨ etkilerine yogunlas¸mıs¸lardır.˘ Ac¸ık belirtme durumu baglam-ba˘ glılık˘ (Nilsson 1985; Enc¸1991; Zidani-Eroglu˘ 1997), ozg¨ ull¨ uk¨ (von Heusinger 2002; von Heusinger and Kornfilt 2005), varsayımlılık (Kennelly 1997; Kelepir 2001), tekilles¸tirme (Nilsson 1985; Taylan and Zimmer 1994; Bolgun¨ 2005; Kılıc¸aslan 2006), sonluluk (Nilsson 1985; Nakipoglu˘ 2009) gibi kavramlarla ilis¸kilendirilmis¸tir. Bu c¸alıs¸maların ortak paydası ac¸ık durum ekiyle anlamsal ya da edimsel bir ulam arasında dolaysız bir ilis¸ki kuruyor olmalarıdır. Tez bu ilis¸kilendirmelerin, ya ampirik veriler kars¸ısında olumlanamayacak kadar ozg¨ ul,¨ ya da ac¸ıklayıcılık ac¸ısından yetersiz kalacak kadar genel olduklarını ileri surmektedir.¨ Tez bunun yerine dil- bilgisi dıs¸ı ogelerin¨ de rol oynayabilecegi˘ bir alan yaratacak s¸ekilde, belirtme durumunun katkısını asgariye indirmeye c¸alıs¸maktadır. Ampirik tarafta, Turkc¸e¨ durum ekinin ozg¨ ull¨ uk¨ ve varlık varsayımı tetikleyicisi olarak ac¸iklanamayacagına˘ dair veriler ortaya konacaktır. Bu ac¸ıklamalar ic¸in problemli olan ver- iler belirtme durum ekiyle c¸esitli ic¸lemsel operatorlerin¨ etkiles¸imlerinde ortaya c¸ıkmaktadır. vi Yakından ilintili bir alana gec¸ilerek, tamamen dilbigisel kaynaklara dayanarak “yansız ezgi” kavramının ac¸ıklanamayacagına˘ dair veri ve tartıs¸malar ortaya konacaktır. Bu tartıs¸maların sonunda birtakım bilgi kuramsal etmenlerin bir tumcenin¨ “yansız ezgi”sinin olus¸masında rol oynadıgı˘ ortaya c¸ıkacaktır. Buradan c¸ıkan sonuc¸ve gozlemler,¨ durum ekinin baglam-ba˘ glılık˘ ile ilkis¸ini ac¸ıklamakta kullanılacaktır. Kuramsal tarafta, sadece gozlemlenen¨ anlamlandırma etkilerini degil,˘ neden Turkc¸e’de¨ birtakım yapıların zorunlu olarak durum eki gerektirdiginin˘ dilbilgisel temelleri aranacaktır. Es¸bagımlılık˘ yapılarındaki verilerden yola c¸ıkılarak, “anlambilimsel govdeleyicilik”¨ kuramının Turkc¸e’deki¨ verileri ac¸ıklamakta yetersiz kaldıgı˘ gosterilecektir.¨ Bunun yerine, ac¸ık durum ekli belirsiz ad obekleri¨ ile sıfır sesdurumlu belirsiz ad obekleri¨ arasındaki farkın “ozellik”¨ ve “tur”¨ kavramları arasındaki farka dayandırılması gerektigi˘ savunulacaktır. Bu baglamda,˘ sıfır ses durumlu belirsiz ad obekleri¨ tur¨ ornekleri¨ uzerinde¨ is¸leyen varlıksal niceleyiciler olarak c¸oz¨ umleneceklerdir.¨ Ac¸ık belirtme durumlu belirsiz ad obekleri¨ ise baglamsal˘ kısıtlara tabi olan ozellikler¨ uzerinde,¨ genel Skolem terimleri olarak tanımlı, gondergesel¨ aygıtlar olarak c¸oz¨ umleneceklerdir.¨ Onerilen¨ c¸oz¨ umlemenin¨ tezde ele alınan ampirik verileri nasıl sagladı˘ gı˘ gosterilecektir.¨ Anahtar Kelimeler: Belirsiz Ad Obekleri,¨ Turkc¸e,¨ Ozg¨ ull¨ uk,¨ Baglam-ba˘ glılık,˘ Odak, Birles¸imsel Ulamsal Dilbilgisi vii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to my supervisor Cem Bozs¸ahin for his guidance, friendship, and collaboration throughout the years. I would like to thank the other members of my examining committee Aslı Goksel¨ and Deniz Zeyrek for their support and guidance through the thesis period. I would like to thank Umit¨ Deniz Turan and Varol Akman for being in my defense jury, and for their feedback and warmth. This thesis has benefited much from discussions with Cem Bozs¸ahin, Aslı Goksel,¨ Cem Keskin, Duygu Ozge,¨ Sumru Ozsoy,¨ Mark Steedman, Ceyhan Temurc¨ u,¨ and Deniz Zeyrek. I am so grateful to them for this. I would like to thank the participants of the Specificity Workshop held in Stuttgart in Au- gust 2010, especially Donka Farkas, Dolgor Guntsetseg, Klaus von Heusinger, Edgar Onea, and Carla Umbach for illuminating discussions. I am grateful to Mark Steedman and TUB¨ ITAK˙ for a year long visit to the ICCS of Uni- versity Edinburgh. I would like to thank the participants of the “Syntax Semantics Research Group” and “The Phonology Workshop” held in Edinburgh during Fall 2007 for valuable discussions. Many people supported me in various ways throughout the thesis period. I would like to thank Nurcan Atakay, Berhayat Bahs¸is¸, Ahmet Beyaz, Kaan Bıyıkoglu,˘ Vicky Chon- drogianni, Duygu C¸ınga, Sibel Gulnar,¨ Necla Is¸ıklar, Canan Ipek,˙ Ali Kantar, Duygu and Yigit˘ Karahanogulları,˘ Asuman and Ozan Keysan, Zerin, Muvaffak and Onur Kuk¨ urt,¨ Belkıs, Hamit and Nazlı Oguz,˘ Cihan Ozkan,¨ Ayfer and Vedat Samra, Kemal and Emine Sofu, Bilge Say, Tim Smith, Ferhat Soylu, Ergun¨ Tepebaglı,˘ Selim Tezcan, Bas¸ar Tuna, Murat Ulubay, and C¸aglar˘ Yalı. I am infinitely grateful to my parents Cahide and Sadi Ozge¨ who were,