Turkish Grammar Agreement
A suffix (ek) is attached to a trunk (g-vde). A trunk can be a root (k-k) or even more analyclic. The suffixes used in Turkish can be divided into two classes: constructive suffix (yap`m ekleri) and flexible suffix (ekim ekleri). A constructive suffix makes a new word of an old word, that is, it is a deducted suffix. A flexible suffix indicates how to use a word in a sentence. The article on Turkish grammar focuses on bending suffixes. The article on Turkish vocabulary deals with constructive suffixes. Note that the o in the suffix-yor does not vary in vocal tuning, and therefore the vowels are in the suffixes that are added that are always the back-ovokale. Numerous researches on agramatism have shown that verbal morphology is particularly vulnerable in people with agrammatic aphasia.
However, only limited studies have examined the asymmetry between the subcategory of the agreement, i.e. person, number and gender (Hartsuiker, Kolk, Huinck, 1999; Janssen – Penke, 2002). This study examines the morphology of the verbal-agreement (SV) by examining in Turkish two grammatical characteristics necessary for the identification of the SV agreement: a) person and b) number. In Turkish, the SV chord is characterized by affixes on the verb that encode the morphosyttic characteristics of the person (π) and number. In Harley and Ritters (2002) function geometry model, the participant node (partial knots) and its dependent persons, address (Addr) and Speaker, are used to represent the person (1), and the individual (Ind) knots and its dependent knots, group and minimal (min), are used to represent the number function. (1) Person has. 1P: [π [part]] b. 2P: [π [Part] Addr (2) Number a.
SG: [-[Ind]] b.PL: [[Ind] Group ] As Speaker (1P) is the default person and min (singular) is the standard number, these characteristics should not be explicitly represented in geometry (Harley -Ritter 2002). As a result, Turkey has a 2P > 1P and PL > SG hierarchy. If coupled with the person and the number, the hierarchy of the agreement is: 2PL > 1PL – 2SG > 1SG. Since 1P forms contain only [part] function without the [Addr] function, it is expected that agrammatic participants will be more accurate on 1P forms than 2P forms. Since the singular forms are represented by the projection of the [Ind] function without the [Group] function, it is predicted that agrammatic participants will be more accurate on the singular 1SG than on the 1SG form than on the 2SG than on the 2SG form.