チュルク諸語における副動詞の諸相と、中央アジアのチュルク諸語における V-(I)p bol-

日髙, 晋介

doi:https://doi.org/10.14943/110525

チュルク諸語における副動詞の諸相と、中央アジアのチュルク諸語における V-(I)p bol-

日髙, 晋介

北方言語研究, 2024, 14, 1-21

Permalink : https://doi.org/10.14943/110525

このアイテムのアクセス数:567件（2026-08-24 16:00 集計）

閲覧可能ファイル

ファイル	フォーマット	サイズ	閲覧回数	説明
01_Hidaka	pdf	837 KB	386

論文情報

ファイル出力 EndNote Basic出力 Mendeley出力

アクセス権	open access
DOI	https://doi.org/10.14943/110525
URI	https://hdl.handle.net/2115/92096
タイトル	チュルク諸語における副動詞の諸相と、中央アジアのチュルク諸語における V-(I)p bol-
タイトル	Issues Related to Converb Use in Turkic Languages and V-(I)p bol- [V-CVB be-] in the Turkic languages of Central Asia
著者	著者名日髙, 晋介 HIDAKA, Shinsuke
言語	日本語
キーワード	converb
	Central Asia
	Turkic Languages
	possibility
	semantic map
	副動詞
	中央アジア
	チュルク諸語
	可能性
	意味領域地図
発行日	2024-03-20
出版者	日本北方言語学会
出版者	Japan Association of Northern Language Studies
収録物名	北方言語研究
収録物名	Northern Language Studies
巻(号)	14
ページ	1-21
抄録	This study is divided into two parts. In Part I, first, I discuss Ebata (2023), which shows a classification of converbs by comparing their cross-linguistic definitions. Ebata’s (2023) classification is composed of three items: clause linkage, adverbial phrase, and part of complex predicate. Secondly, I explain the use of converbs in Turkic languages. Converbs take many forms and are used frequently in Turkic languages. Therefore, these languages provide rich ground for cross-linguistic analysis of converb use. Finally, I review the literature and provide direction for future research. In Part II, I discuss the meanings of V-(I)p bol- [V-CVB be-] in the Turkic languages of Central Asia based on previous research and the interview examinations I conducted with native speakers. I examine two opinions on the diachronic paths of modal meanings in V-(I)p bol-: Schönig (1987: 15) argued that modal meaning in V-(I)p bol- developed from actional meaning, while Rentzsch (2015: 95) stated that replacing purposive converb V-GAlI in V-GAlI bol- to consequential converb -(I)p led to modal meaning in V-(I)p bol-. Checking their meanings with the semantic map of possibility by Van der Auwera and Plungian (1998), I clarify that each language lacks participant-internal possibility. Lacking participant-internal possibility violates the principle that markers that can express two meanings on an identical path of the modal map can express any meaning between these two meanings. However, lacking participant-internal possibility does not contradict the semantic map if each actional meaning and modal meaning developed independently. Therefore, I support the opinion of Rentzsch (2015), not Schönig (1987).
資源タイプ	紀要論文
出版タイプ	Version of Record
PISSN	2185-7121
NCID	AA12516968
関連情報	CRID 1050581533886216192