Lexical-Grammatical Categories of Adjectives in the Modern Crimean Tatar Language

Asanova Zera PhD in Philology Associate Professor of the Department of Crimean Tatar and Turkish Language Studies at Crimean University of Engineering and Teaching 295000, Russia, respublika Krym, g. Simferopol', ul. Per.uchebnyi, 8 zera_asan@mail.ru Other publications by this author

In the Turkic languages, the adjective name has no pronounced morphological features in comparison with the adjective name in inflectional languages. Morphologically, this part of speech does not change according to the inflectional categories of the noun: the categories of case, gender, number, affiliation and person. According to the meaning and grammatical features, adjectives are divided into two lexical and grammatical categories (the term "grammatical" indicates that, along with semantics, morphemic, morphological and syntactic features of the analyzed object are necessarily taken into account). The issue of determining the criteria for dividing adjectives into qualitative and relative ones is relevant in Turkology.

E. R. Tenishev believes that relative and qualitative adjectives were already represented in the Proto-Turkic language ^{[7, p. 153]}. At the same time, the boundary between them lay in the semantic-functional plane. According to the scientist, at that time there was a group of adjectives that, performing the function of defining nouns, called signs only of objects. There was another group. It included adjectives denoting signs of both objects and actions. This allowed such adjectives to act as an attributive definition of nouns and a circumstantial definition of verbs. These semantic and functional groups of this part of speech have been preserved and are developing in modern Turkic languages. In the Proto-Turkic language, morphological distinctions of qualitative and relative adjectives did not yet exist.

The purpose of the article is to determine the principles of differentiation of lexical and grammatical categories of adjectives in the modern Crimean Tatar language.

Despite the fact that the establishment of the most important differences in the semantics of adjectives is associated with the differentiation of two main categories (qualitative adjectives and relative adjectives), it is quite difficult to make such a distinction. In this regard, attempts are being made in modern linguistics to classify adjectives based on other principles. For example, M. F. Lukin ^[4] divides adjectives into two groups according to the nature of the manifestation of the trait: gradational and static. In the first group, the author combines adjectives denoting the gradation feature of the object (light, beautiful), that is, a movable feature that can manifest itself to a greater or lesser extent. As a result, gradational adjectives have degrees of comparison. To the second group, the author refers adjectives denoting a static (permanent, absolute) sign: eternal, deaf, coffee, etc.

Of particular interest is the classification of adjectives by M. V. Nikitin ^[6]. The main idea of the author is the assertion that the signs are expressed only by those adjectives that really denote the property in the proper sense of the word. In the traditional classification, they correspond to qualitative adjectives. In turn, relative adjectives are an indicator not of words with characteristic semantics, but of words with a characteristic function. M. V. Nikitin divides proper-featured adjectives into relational and non-relational ones ^{[6, p. 70]}. According to the author, non-relational adjectives denote signs that are not conditioned by the relationship of this object to other objects, but are inherent in it initially, embedded in it as its component: red, round, etc. Relational adjectives in their semantics contain the relations themselves, that is, they call the differences of objects according to the ratios: far – near, past – present – future, etc. In the category of relational adjectives, the author identifies six groups: conversive, vector, coordinate, evaluative pragmatic, evaluative cognitive and adjectival words of deictic semantics.

S. A. Vinogradova believes that the division of adjectives into qualitative and relative ones is the most general and consistent, while other classifications based on other principles can be imposed on this classification ^[2].

Thus, the traditional classification is the most universal. Other types of classifications fit into its framework to one degree or another. At the same time, the traditional classification does not fully reflect the existing lexical and grammatical features of adjectives. Thus, a number of qualitative adjectives in their semantics and morphological structure do not have grammatical features inherent in adjectives of this category.

For the modern Crimean Tatar language, the division of adjectives according to the peculiarities of the formation and expression of a feature into two lexical and grammatical categories is relevant: qualitative and relative. The terms "asli syfat" and "nisbiy syfat" are used to designate these categories.

The named digits are not closed groups. The boundary between them is mobile, since semantic features that allow distinguishing one category of adjectives from another are subject to changes.

Qualitative adjectives denote signs that are perceived as directly inherent in the objects of reality, that is, they are inseparable from the object itself (inje ‘thin', tar ‘narrow', kalyn ‘fat', etc.). Relative adjectives expressing a permanent feature (ilmiy ‘scientific', tyunevinki ‘yesterday’, etc.), call the signs of objects inherent in the determined objects of reality on the basis of various relationships with another phenomenon of reality. However, each relative adjective already contains a potential meaning of quality. Because of this, the transition of relative adjectives into qualitative adjectives is possible.

The semantics of qualitative and relative adjectives is determined by their ability to express or not express the intensity of the named attribute: 1) qualitative adjectives refer to non-permanent signs of objects that can manifest themselves with varying intensity (ufak ‘small’, ufakcha ‘smaller’, ufachyk ‘tiny’, etc.); 2) relative adjectives refer to static signs of objects through relations to other objects (gyaeviy ‘ideological', kyshlyk ‘winter', yyrtyk ‘torn’, etc.). In the Crimean Tatar language, this principle of differentiation of adjectives does not always work, because among qualitative adjectives there are words that cannot grade the named attribute, for example: ker ‘blind', chubar ‘pock-marked’, etc. In determining the nature of the attribute, the connection with the object or person being determined should be taken into account.

As noted above, qualitative and relative adjectives differ structurally: relative adjectives are derivatives, and qualitative adjectives are non–derivatives. The main criterion is the method of nominating a feature: direct or indirect. This is reflected in the word-formation structure of the analyzed part of speech. However, it should be noted that in the Crimean Tatar language, certain qualitative adjectives are derivatives: akyl + syz‘stupid’, kuch + liu ‘strong’, etc. (when affixing substantive word forms, there is a transition to the sphere of proper characteristic words). In addition, in a number of relative adjectives there are those whose derivation is controversial. Usually these are adjectives of foreign origin: agrarian‘agrarian', legal ‘legal’, etc.

There is no doubt that the main differential feature in the differentiation of qualitative and relative adjectives are the features of the semantics of adjectives.

In accordance with the lexical and semantic features, the following groups of qualitative adjectives can be distinguished in the Crimean Tatar language: 1) sensory adjectives characterizing: a) taste qualities: adjy ‘bitter', action ‘sour'; b) weight, shape: agyr ‘heavy', tomalak ‘round', engil ‘light'; c) temperature: suvuk ‘cold’, issy ‘warm’, syd‘hot’; d) sense of smell: chuluk ‘rotten’; e) touch: tyuz ‘smooth, smooth’, tagiz ‘smooth (smooth)’;f) auditory perception: tynyk ‘deaf, not loud’, yavash ‘quiet’; kyaryk ‘hoarse’; f) visual perception: colors: yesil ‘green’, kara ‘black’, sary ‘yellow’, mavy ‘blue’, kyrmyzy ‘red’, beyaz ‘white’; size: ken ‘wide’, uzun ‘long’, tar ‘narrow’, kysk‘short’, balaban ‘big’, ufak ‘small’, yuksek‘high’, alchak‘low’; 2) adjectives with a meaning related to utility, value: faidals ‘useful’, paals‘dear’, kerexiz‘unnecessary’; 3) social affiliation: buy ‘rich’, fukare ‘poor’; 4) emotional properties, states and attitudes: inat ‘stubborn’, korkak ‘cowardly’, edepsis ‘ill-mannered’, sabyrly ‘patient’; 5) ethical and aesthetic assessment: chirkin ‘ugly’, narin‘elegant’, sert, kabah ‘rude’; 6) general assessment: jan ‘new’, eski ‘old’, yahshy ‘good’, yaman ‘bad’, paals ‘dear’, ujuz‘cheap’; 7) estimated value (appearance, physical condition): boyle ‘tall’, aryk ‘thin’, sokur ‘blind’, sagyr ‘deaf’; 8) physiological characteristics of a person: tok ‘well-fed’, ach ‘hungry’;9) emotional state: shen ‘joyful’, ghamly ‘sad’; 10) socio-intellectual sphere: akyll ‘smart’, ankav ‘stupid’, iradeli ‘strong-willed’, iradesiz ‘weak-willed’, etc’

The lex’cal corpus of qualitative adjecti’es of the Cri’ean Tatar language is diverse in its etymological and word-formation features. Qualitative non-derivative adjectives form the core of this lexico-grammatical class: temiz ‘pure’, kara‘black’, etc. The nuclear adjectives can also include derived adjectives with the meaning of the intensity of the trait (mas-mavy ‘blue-blue, very blue’, sap-sary ‘yellow-yellow, very yellow, etc.). A large group of qualitative adjectives is made up of derivatives of other parts of speech, which are called a qualitative feature: a bunch of ‘strength’ > kuchlu ‘strong’, kesmek‘cut’ > keskin ‘acute’, etc.

The lexico-grammatical category of relative adjectives differs from qualitative ones in semantic and grammatical features. Relative adjectives do not express the category of the degree of quality, do not enter into antonymic relations. Often in the Crimean Tatar language, instead of the construction “relative adjective + noun”, izafet constructions (I izafet) are used, for example: demir kapi (lit. ‘iron door’) instead of demirli kaps ‘iron door’ in the same meaning.

The main lexical corp’s of relative adjectives is represen’ed by morphological derivatives: ilim ‘science’ > ilmiy‘scientific’, oz ‘myself’ > ozgyun ‘peculiar, specific’, achmak ‘open’ > achyk ‘open’, etc.

Relative adjectives make up the semantic periphery of adjectives, which is due to the derivation of their semantics from the basics of other parts of speech.

Since relative adjectives are lexical units motivated by meaning and derived in form, their semantics is formed on the basis of the interaction of derived bases and word-forming affixes. The research materials allow us to distinguish four main groups by the nature of the trait: 1) adjectives with the meaning of the presence of a feature called a motivating adjective: kuflu ‘moldy’, elakly ‘striped’, etc.; 2) adjectives with the meaning of the absence of a feature called a motivating adjective: medeniyetsiz‘uncultured’, kanatsyz ‘wingless’, etc.; 3) temporal and spatial signs: afta lyk ‘weekly’, tarladaki ‘field’, byltyrki ‘last year’, etc.; 4) a sign in relation to the action: koterinki ‘elevated’, kyzgyn ‘hot, incandescent’, bogujy ‘suffocating’, etc.

Conclusion. In the modern Crimean Tatar language, qualitative and relative adjectives are varieties of one broader and more general grammatical and semantic type. They are open discharges, the boundaries between those which are not clearly defined.

The article proposes the principles of differentiation of qualitative and relative adjectives, taking into account the interaction of their grammatical and lexical meanings.