ქართული ანბანი

           Morphological integration of transfers from foreign languages    

                                            in Caucasian Urum

                                            Jikia Marika & Tsereteli Nutsa

                                  Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State Univesity, Georgia

                                    jikiamarika@hotmail.com, nutsatsereteli@yahoo.com


  1.Introduction

Migration of Turkish-speaking Greeks to the territory of Georgia started in 1829-30. According to the Adrianopolis peace treaty through meditation of Russian general Paskevich the Russian emperor Nikolay I issued the permission to Greeks living in Eastern Anatolyan vilaets to move to Georgia. Greeks settled in Southern part of Georgia, mainly in Tsalka region. This part of Georgia in the result of Turkish and Dagestan invasion was almost abandoned. By 1830 in Tsalka region there were 18 Greek villages. Due to the above mentioned circumstances Georgians had to abandon the territory. In the same period Greeks from North-East Turkish villages were moved to Dmanisi region of Georgia.

Urum is quite an interesting socio-linguistic  phenomenon. It is spoken in some  villages around the area.Our object language as compared with Turkish, the dialect of which it in fact is, has  quite changed.Urum could not appear here as a developed language and regular use of it by representatives of not Turkish origin caused simplification of its structure.

Turkish speaking Greeks having lived in the USSR for quite a long time didn’t have any chance of regular contacts with Turkish world, even with Azerbaijanians who also lived in the Soviet Union and are Turkish-speakers as well. It’s true that Turkish speaking Greeks lived in Georgia, anyway in Soviet reality ethnic minorities living in Georgia infect didn’t study Georgian and got Russian education. They used Georgian in rare occasions. Thus, Urums lived in linguistically isolated environment: they had negotiations with Georgians, Russians (by all means they would go to Russian schools), Armenians(living in the same region) and partly with Azerbaijanians.   Proceeding from this, their language had a quite strong influence of Russian and from the other languages it borrowed few lexical units as well.

The Greek language underwent very strong influence of the Turkish language in the course of several centuries, which almost completely ejected the Greek language from the Urum people speech. Having settled in Georgia Urums once again appeared in a new language environment. Their speech was again filled with new lexical elements. This process is absolutory natural in the history of language development. It is well known, that among the sources of enrichment   the    lexics. Besides the new word creating an important role is played by the process of word borrowing from other languages. Urum language is not the exception. This is proved by the analyses of the corpus data collected from native-speaking informants. In Tsalka region Russian, Georgian, and Armenian are the languages that surround the Urum language.

      Nowadays Tsalkian Urum involves several language lexical layers and thus can be considered as a “mixed” language. In soviet times in their speech Russian clichés have taken considerable part and even borrowings of whole phrases and sentences took place.

 2.Methodology

The research is based on a corpus data of Turkish-speaking Greeks. The material has been collected, transcribed and translated by one of the project participants Violeta Moisidi belonging to above mentioned ethnic group within the framework of Bielefeld university project. 13 native speakers living in Tbilisi, Georgia had been recorded, they were asked to answer some questions spontaneously, to speak naturally, as if they were talking with friends. The questions had been chosen from different topics touching the following issues- Ancestors, Culture, Feast, Family, Language, Village, People and Marriage. Each speaker was due to answer all the eight topics within 15 minutes. Glossing of the collected data was carried out by me.

  3.Integration of foreign elements

As it is known, when several languages appear in one area, priority is given to one of them. The priority may be conditioned by a political situation or the predomination of people of other nationality. Firstly, substitution of lexical units of one language by the relevant segments of another language takes place, then it is followed by the changes in grammatical structure of a language and by and by the language loses peculiar to it properties and then, it dies. Yet, nevertheless it leaves some traces. As previous and present day research results show there is quite a number of Russian and little amount of  Georgian,  Greek and Armenian words in Urum, though prevailing are the Russian ones, and it is not surprising as in the 19^th century  Georgia so later in the entire Soviet Union, the Russian language actually was  the state language.

Russian borrowings mostly are nouns. Anyway other parts of speech are also met. Russian words are the main elements of phraseology.

As it is known, the words limited by system connection don’t easily transfer from one language to another. That’s why borrowed nouns are more frequently met than that of verbs.

     4.Morphological integrations of nouns

It is known that when a word from a certain language transfers into another different structure language it changes its sound form as a rule. The stronger the borrowed word is established in the recipient’s speech, the more it obeys to phonetic and phonologic norms of the latter.

In accord with the orthography norms in Russian oral speech stressless /e/ deviates toward /i/, e.g.: телевизор (television) is pronounced as tilivizor. It is similar in some Russian borrowings in Urum.

-iе ending changes into -ia complex in singular nouns, e.g.: mučenie (torment)> mučenia, pakalenye(generation)>pakalenya, okruzhenie(environment)>okruzhenia, pretesneniye (resettlement)> pretesneniya

More could be said about these kind of phonologic changes anyway, the goal of presented work is description and analysis of the process of morphological integration of borrowings.

Thus, this paper addresses the issue of morphologic integration of Russian borrowings in Urum. In particular, the ways of adding case, possession and plural markers to nouns. As well as formation of verbs.

4.1.Number

In Urum as well as in Standard Turkish there are two numbers: singular and plural. The category of number is expressed by the  plural suffixes-lAr and -nAr, whereby the vowel is determined by the frontness harmony.With a stem-finalback vowel plural suffix is -lar, e.g.: yol-lar ‘roads’, whereaswith stem-final front vowel plural suffix is-lär, e.g.:  äv-lär‘houses’. The variation of plural suffixes-nAroccurs with a stem-final alveolar nazaln and this phenomenon is explained by assimilation, e.g: On-nar ‘they’.

Formation of plural number peculiar for Urum  with Russian borrowings is as followes, plural suffixes are added directly to the stem of borrowed (Russian) word keeping to the rule of vowel harmony characteristic for Urum, e.g.: the word  mučenia(torture) ends in back vowel -a and takes the suffix –lar, e.g:

1.        mučenia-lar-ınan    biz-ım halh    gäl-di

torture -PL  -INSTR 1.PL -GEN people come-PST

‘Our people arrived with many difficulties.’ (UUM-TXT-AN-00000-B01.008)

Also, as far as the word rodstvenık(relative) ends in back vowel – ı, is formed through the suffix –lar:

2.        sağ  rodstvenık-lar gäl-äsi-dır-lär

all relative    -PL  come -CONV -EPST.COP-PL

‘All relatives should also come.’ (UUM-TXT-FE-00000-B09.006)

The same model works with other nouns as well, e.g.: zemlyanka(dugout)-lar, udobstva(convenience)-lar, bochka(barrel)-lar, korzinka(baskets)-lar,  urok(lesson)-lar, čaška(glass)-lar,  padruga(friend)-lar, blyuda(dishes)-lar, kultura(culture)-lar.

The borrowing that ends in front vowel, is formed through the suffix – lär, e.g.:

3.        kamfet -lär meivä -lär   gätır -ier  -lär

candy  -PL   fruit  -PL   bring-IPFV-PL

‘(They)bring candies and fruits.’ (UUM-TXT-MR-00000-B01.008)

In the given example the last vowel of the word kamfet(candy) is -e.

The suffix -nAr also applies to recent borrowings from Russian, e.g., slon(elephant)-nar, zakon(low)-nar.

Neither Turkic languages nor Urum have the grammatical category of gender. Hence, case of Russian noun phrase borrowings different gender adjectival modifiers are presented in one and the same form. It is particularly evident, with feminine and neutral loan words (in singular).

In case of borrowed noun phrase, adjectival modifiers as a rule are met in only masculine gender in nominative case, e.g.: vеchni pereselenia (constant ressetelment); gruzinski naselenia (Georgian population), instead of vеchnoe pereselenie (constant ressetelment); gruzinskoe naselenie (Georgian population).  Borrowed modifier is presented by the suffix -I, that is unnatural for Russian oral speech and orthography.

In all Turkic languages the nouns are always in singular with

·         cardinal numerals: besh “five”, on “ten”

·          With indefinite pronouns:  çok “many”, fazla “too much”,  also az “few” (when it is the opposite to many)

·         definite pronouns  her, hep, bütün “all”

In noun phrase construction head noun and modifier are presented by nouns.  It is necessary  for agreement that sintacticaly connected words – main and subordinate – must have common category. Head noun is never declined in Urum noun phraze just as it is in other Turkic languages. Thus,  the category of number is maintained  as a common one. With number agreement the issue of sinesys that is attraction should be discussed by all means.  Usually the influence of  context on a form is called  sinesis. When the lexical peculiarity of a dominant member is reflected  by the form of  a subordinate member. More exeptable seems the explanation of sinesis, according which the grammatical form neglected and priority is given  to the context. sinesis should be considerd as the agreement between the noun phrase expresing plurality and the modifier in plural. This phenomenon is dominating in Urum, e.g.:

·         čoğ ol-di izmenenia-lar

                        Many be-PST change-PL

                       ‘Has changed a lot’

                                                               

Noun phrase containing quantifier, mainly, cardinal numeral, sometimes is followed by special words, e.g.:

·         Tane – piece (thing), beştanekalem – five pens

·         Baş – head, on başinek – ten heads of cows

·         Takım – complect, ikitakımçamaşır – two set of linen

·         Adet – piece, quantity, bin adetötöbüs – thousand buses

·         Çift – pair,  üççiftçorap – three pairs of socks(stockings, tights)

·         El – game, set, beş el oynamak – five sets of game

·         Parça, dilim – piece, slice, part ; birdilim (parça) ekmek – one piece of bread

A.N. Kononov calls such explanatory words – the numeratives. According to him, special explanatory words: baş (head), adet(piece), tane(piece, thing), takım(set), çift(pair), el(hand), dilim/parça (piece, slice) are introduced in the position between the cardinal numerals and nouns.

“The Turkish language Grammar” by T. Banguoglu says that if the noun is preceded by a cardinal numeral (1,2,10, 100, etc), it stays in singular. Similar viewpoint is given in a grammar book by Z. Korkmaz, where the author says “a noun can be preceded as by any numeral so definite or indefinite pronoun bütün, bazı, başka, her, kimi, çok, herhangi, hiçbir, fazla, birtakım etc. In such cases (possibly only with some pronouns) the noun cannot be put in plural.

The issue is also touched upon by H. Ediskun. According to him cardinal numerals, except “one” express plurality. Nouns determined by those kinds of numerals, as a rule don’t take plural suffixes. It is the same in Urum as well:

·         gäl -dı -lär        ğırh    beš     gün   daže         čoğ –da

    come -PST –PL  forty     five  day   even_Russian  many  -and

   ‘They were on the way forty five days and even more.’

According to M. Hengirman, indefinite pronouns are the names that never define nouns, never specify the number of nouns. They are: hiç, bir, birkaç, birçok, her, herhangi, nice (head noun stays in singular form) and bazı, bütün, birtakım(head noun stays in plural form). InUrum:

·         čoğ     urum    halh      ğal -di          ğapıbaja -sız

     many  Urum   people   stay –PST   door  hut  -without

    ‘Many Urum people left without houses.’

Though there are some deviation. E.g.:

·         or -da          čoğ      köv -lär        var 

   there -LOC  many  village -PL   be  

  ‘ There are many  villages.’

·         äp äv -lär -i

    all   house -PL   -ACC

  ‘all houses.’

.

Z. Korkmaz considers that if in a noun phrase containing a cardinal numeral where the head noun  stands  in the plural form, it means that it is out of subordination (leaves an ordinary form of attribute) and defines a definite person or thing that have obtained some peculiarities.

According to Ianos Ekman a plural suffix following a cardinal numeral is used to underline plurality. E.g.:

·         Iki ağalarından biri köpek sever idi.

Two master-POSS.3.SG-ABL one-ACC dog love PST.COP

‘Out of two masters one loved the dog.’

In noun phrase containing a cardinal numeral where head noun stays in plural form can be explained by the influence of translation from a foreign language. As it is e.g.: Üç Silahşörler(Three Musketeers) by A. Dumas, Kırk Haramiler(a book of tales “1001 nights”), Yedi Cüceler (“a snow white and seven dwarfs”) by H.K. Andersen must be coming from their fore languages where plural agreement in the noun phrase  involving cardinal number head noun stays in plural. E.g.: seven dwarfs (YediCüceler). As for the noun phrases coming from Turkish reality (Beşevler, Doksanevler, Altıoklar, YediGöller, Üç Aylar,YediMeşaleciler, Dört Büyükler) it is shown, that they do not keep to obey the rule (that is don’t have the function of head noun) and indicates a concrete person or thing, that have attached some characteristic feature. To be more exact – when we say Üç Ay, it means any three months, yet, when we say Üç Aylar these are the three months of Rejeb, Shakhban and Ramazan. All the three are Moslim calendar Holy months.  Üç Turunçlar (the name of a very famous fruit in Turkish folkloire), similar to it altı ok  - six arrows. Existing in Turkey a surname Altıoklar is associated with the Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and his government, known under the name “six arrows” denoting six orientation of policy, that symbolically were expressed through “six arrows”.

It seems interesting to  mention, that in Urum in case of Russian borrowings we have come across the deviation in noun phrase involving quantifying determiner, such as “many”, where head noun stays in plural form, instead of singular E.g.:

·         čoğ      mučenia -lar –ınan         bizım  halh      gäl –di

                        Many   torture  -PL  -INSTR  our     people   come –PST

                        ‘Our people arrived with many difficulties.’

4.2.Possession

The category of possession – is a grammatical category, which defines connections between a person of possessor and a subject of possession.Suffixes indicating possession in Urum are:

          SGPL

1 P- (I)m                                       -(I)mIz

2 P  - (I)n                                       -(I)z

3 P– (s)I(n)                                    - lArI

The allomorphs with initial vowel - (I)m/- (I)n of the 1. and 2. Person occur after consonants, e.g.: barmag-ın ‘finger-POSS.2.SG’

The third person singular allomorph-(s)I(n)occurs –sI after consonant, e.g.: yarı -si ‘its  half’, appears as -(s)I when no other suffix follows it, iš-lär-i‘ his/her things’. When it is followed by a case suffix it appears as -(s)In: äp -sın-dän ‘from its whole ’, torpağ-ın-a ‘to his/her ground’.

In contrast to standard Turkish, Urum uses 2^nd plural possessive suffix -(I)zinstead of -(I)nIz.second person plural predicate and possessive suffixes are in a condensed form, actually drops out  -n-/ -ını-/ -ini-;  -nı-/ -ni- -nu-/ -nü-. E.g.: Turk. Babanız, Urum. Babaz. ‘your father’.

Here should be mentioned that morphologic integration of loan words in Urum takes place in following manner – to the loan word stem directly is added existing in Urum possessive affixes preserving vowel harmony characteristic for this language, e.g:

4.        ukraina-nın      teretoria -sın-a

Ukraine - GEN territory -POSS.3-DAT

‘To Ukrainian territory.’(UUM-TXT-AN-00000-B05.006)

5.        atnašenia -mız-da  yahšiol- ier

relationship -POSS.1.PL -and good   be - IPFV

‘We have good relationships.’ (UUM-TXT-PP-00000-B02.009)

From given examples it is evident that in loan words ukraina (Ukrain) and atnašenia (relationships) the  stems are followed by the Urum possessive suffixes.

Also, shkola-m-a (school-POSS.1.SG-DAT) – in my school; semya-m-da (famıly-POSS.1.SG-LOC)–in my family; agarod-un-a (garden- POSS.2.SG-DAT) –in your garden; babushka-si(grandmother-POSS.3.SG)- his grandmother; kalichestvo-su-ni(quantıty-POSS.3.SG-ACC) –it’s quantity; palajenia-mız-da(situation-POSS.1.PL-LOC) – in our situation;

4.3.Case

Urum has the following cases:

Nominative     -Ø   

Accusative      -i

Genitive          -(n)In

Dative             -A

Locative          -DA

Ablative          -DAn

Instrumental   -(I)nIn/-(I)nAn

In Urum loan words completely obey the norms of the Turkish language grammar and    are morphologically easily integrated into the case system. The case markers are directly added to the root of loanwords, e.g.:

Nominative case:

Familya–surname, mashina–vehicle;kniga –book;pokolenie –generation;pogoda -  weather;

put – way; fartuk – apron;

Accusative case:

parašok-i(powder-ACC) - powder; shkola-y-i (school-ACC)-school;most-i (bridge-ACC) -bridge;

Genitive case:

halh-ın(people-GEN) -of people; karzinka-nın(basket - GEN)-of basket;

Dative case:

rayon-a (region-DAT)-in region; ulitsa-y-a(street-DAT)–on the street;

Locative case:

bochka-da(barrel-LOC) -in a barrel;Gruzia-da(Georgia-LOC) -in Georgia;

Ablative case:

Turtsia- dan (Turkey-ABL) -From Turkey;shkola-dan(school-ABL) -from school;

Instrumental case:

Aktsent-ınan(accent  -INSTR) - with accent; dvorig-ınan ( yard -INSTR) - with yard

.

      5.Morphological Integration of verbs

Basing on the analysis of our data we can say that quite a number of Russian non-finite verbs are met in loan words. Mostly they are initial components of compound predicate. Verbs are transferred in infinitive form. Russian borrowed verbs often have contracted softness marker (Russian letter ‘ь’) of infinitive suffix –ать. Verbs transferred in such forms are not used independently to express any kind of action. They form complex verbs by means of auxiliary verbs, e.g.:

6.        atmečat  ed -ier  -lär

celebrate do -IPFV –PL

‘(They) celebrate.’ (UUM-TXT-FE-00000-B01.001)

First part atmečat(celebrate) of this compound verb atmečat  edierlär  is Russian which is an indefinite  form of a verb and is not nominal and  it doesn’t decline. Russian infinitive followed by the Urum auxiliary verb etmeh (Trk. Etmek), given in Present Definite tense 3^rd person plural. Thus, we got Russian-Urum compound verb.  Also:

7.           näsıl paskha -i    vstrečat ed -ier  -lär

   how     Easter -ACC  meet      do -IPFV

  ‘How Easter celebrate.’ (UUM-TXT-FE-00000-B04.001)

First part vstrečat (meet) of this compound verb vstrečat edierlär is Russian infinitive form and is followed by the Urum auxiliary verb etmeh (Trk. Etmek) that stands in Present Definite tense 3^rd person plural. That is, compound verb stem is given by two verb stems – Russian and native.

Besides the auxiliary etmeh we also have the auxiliary verb olmah (Trk. Olmak, with the same function) that gives Russian-Urum compound predicate, e.g.:

8.         nezavisimaya ol-di

independent became-PST

‘Independent become’

9.        izmenenya ol-di

changes     became-PST

                ‘changes had happened.’

In the given examples Russian loan words – nezavisimaya(independent) and  izmenenya(changes)–represent nominal part of the complex verb as well.

In Russian borrowed verbs are often met different forms of the infinitive which are also used along with the auxiliary verb, e.g.:

10.       nazıvatsa - ed -er  tsalka

call - do –IPFV Tsalka

‘Is called Tsalka.’ (UUM-TXT-AN-00000-B01.009)

11.     Tsalka -da abasnavatsa et-tı-lar

Tsalka -LOC settle      do-PST-PL

‘They settled in Tsalka.’ (UUM-TXT-AN-00000-B08.007)

Besides the auxiliary verbs etmeh and  olmah with loan words is used the  auxiliary verb imeh (Trk. imek), e.g.:

12.     o   pastayanni abizatelni-idi

constant    necessary-PST.COP

‘it was necessary.’ (UUM-TXT-MR-00000-B05.006)

13.     or -da   dört ulitsa idi

here -LOC  four  street -PST.COP

‘And there were also four straight streets.’ (UUM-TXT-VL-00000-B02.009)

In both above mentioned examples the auxiliary imeh is represented through Past tense 3^rd person singular.

Mostly etmeh, olmah and imeh are used as auxiliary verbs, not having their own separate meaning. Observed data have shown, that besides the auxiliary verbs building of verbal constructions is possible with predicate markers as well, in particular, with the affix - DIr.e.g.:

14.     bu dildialekt-tır

this language dialect -EPST.COP

               ‘This language is a dialect.’(UUM-TXT-LG-00000-B11.004)

15.     biz  -ım halh čoğ gastepriimnı-dır

1.PL -GEN  people  very  hospitable -EPST.COP

                ‘Our people are very hospitable.’(UUM-TXT-PP-00000-B05.005)

To express action or state along with loan word there is aTurkish predicative word var expressing  possession. In this case as well, loan words are nouns followed by the verb var, e.g.:

16.     biz  -ım        dil      -dä           čoğ     raznitsa    var

1.PL -GEN  language -LOC  many  difference be

‘There is a big difference in our language.’ (UUM-TXT-LG-00000-B02.001)

17.     pismenast’ var ärbiriš var

writingbe everything be

                ‘It has the writing.’ (UUM-TXT-LG-00000-B11.003)

Obtained data analysis has shown that to form verbal construction Russian borrowings are often followed by the Turkish auxiliary verb and so expresses action or state. Although, there are some cases when the borrowed verb is used directly instead of Turkish corresponding word.

18.       pekut birtänä   yahši  kada

  bake   one         good  Kada/cake

                 ‘They bake a brioche.’ (UUM-TXT-FE-00000-B04.002)

Pekut (bake) instead of Turkish corresponding word  pişir.

Georgian borrowings:

In obtained data there were only a few words borrowed from Georgian

tavisuplad  – freely

russet-ya (Russia - DAT)– to Russia;

kalata-i(basket-ACC) – basket

Greek borrowings:

there was only one

medamorfos  –Metamorphosis (Transformation);

Azerbaijanian borrowings:

In Azerbaijanian the word for goodis yaxşı, derived verb has recovered– yaxşılaştı. Must be borrowed from Azerbaijanian

.

6.Conclusions

The obtained data enables us to conclude that the borrowed words completely obey the norms of the Urum language grammar and makes it easy to morphologically integrate in nominal part. In particular, in categories of case, number and possession. Case, number and possessive suffixes are directly added to the borrowed word stems keeping to the rule of vowel harmony existing in the Urum language.

In verbal part language chooses three ways:

1.        Loan verb preserves its infinitive form, then Urum auxiliary verbs  - imeh, olmah, etmeh attache to it and they form a compound verb.

2.        Predicative suffixes are attached to borrowed words

3.        The borrowed verb form replaces corresponding Urum verb.

7. Abbreviations

ABL: ablative

ACC: accusative

DAT: dative

GEN: genitive

INSTR: instrumental

IPFV: imperfective

LOC: locative

PL: plural

POSS: possessive

PST: past

PST.COP: past copula

References

Banguoğlu, Tahsin.1995. TürkçeninGrameri. Ankara: Türk DilKurumuYayınları(in Turkish).

Ediskun, Haydar.2003. Türk Dilbilgisi.  İstanbul: Remzi Kitabevi (in Turkish).

Göksel, Aslı; Kerslake, Celia. 2005. Turkish: a comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.

Gudiashvili, Elisabed.V., 1949. Osobennostituretskovogovoranaseleniyatsalkinskogoraiona [Characteristics of Turkish speech of Tsalka region population].Thesis, Tbilisi(in Russian).

Gudiashvili,Elisabed.1960.kvemoTsalk’isturkulimet’q’velebiszogiertileksik’uritaviseburebisshesakheb.[About some lexical peculiarities of  lower Tsalka Turkish speech]. St’alinissakhelobistbilisissakhelmtsipouniversit’et’isshromebi (Works of StalinTbilisi state university). vol 91. pp.197-207(in Georgian).

Hengirmen, Mehmet. 2005. TürkçeDilBilgisi. Ankara: EnginYayınevi (in Turkish).

Janashia, NodarN., 1954. Zemotsalk’isturkulimet’q’velebistaviseburebani [Peculiarities of Turkish speaking population of upper Tsalka].Thesis, Tbilisi  (in Georgian).

Jikia, Marina S. 1984. Strukturaslovoformturetsk’ogoyazika.[The structure of the Turkish language wordforms]. Tbilisi: Metsniereba (in Russian).

Kaukhchishvili, Simon., 1942. Berdznebisdasaxlebisistoriasaqartveloshi.[The history of Greeks migrationto Georgia]. Qutaisisa.tsuluk’idzissaxelobissaxelmtsipop’edinst’it’ut’isshromebi [Works of Kutaisi A. Tsulukidze state Pedagogical Institute]. vol.4. Kutaisi(in Georgian).

Kononov, Andrey. 1956. Gramatsika sovremennogo Turetsk’ogo literaturnogo iazyka[The grammar of the modern Turkish language]. Ak’ademianaukSSSR, Inst’itutvostok’ovedenia.1-569. Moscow-Leningrad: ScientistsAcademy (in Russian).

Korelov, Iosif. A. 1993. Sopostaviteljnyjanalizbazisnychurovnejstrukturyjazykaurumov [Comparative analyses of basic levels of Urum structure].Abstract of doctoral thesis. Tbilisi, GAS (in Russian).

Korkmaz,Zeynep. 2003. Türkiye Türkçesi Grameri,Şekil Bilgisi.Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu Yayınları /827(in Turkish).

Moisidi, Skopeteas, Tsereteli 2014, Urum data collection (data collected, transcribed and translated by Violeta Moisidi; revised and glossed by Nutsa Tsereteli; corpus design by Stavros Scopeteas. Bielefeld: Bielefeld University Corpus Resource)