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 does not have 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 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 the signs of only 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, in modern linguistics, attempts are being made 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 subject (light, beautiful), that is, the sign is mobile, capable of manifesting 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) attribute: eternal, deaf, coffee and others.

Of particular interest is the classification of adjectives by M. V. Nikitin ^[6]. The main idea of the author is the statement 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 groups ^{[6, p. 70]}. According to the author, non-relational adjectives denote signs that are not conditioned by the relationship of this subject to other subjects, but are inherent to it initially, embedded in it as its component: red, round and others. Relational adjectives contain the relations themselves in their semantics, that is, they call the differences of objects by relations: distant – close, past – present – future and others. 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].

As a result, 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 the sign into two lexical and grammatical categories is relevant: qualitative and relative. The terms "asliy 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 subject itself (inje ‘thin’, tar ‘narrow’, kalyn ‘thick’ etc.). Relative adjectives expressing a constant attribute (ilmiy ‘scientific’, tunevinki ‘yesterday,’ etc.), call the signs of objects inherent in the defined 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 with varying intensity (ufa ‘small’, ufa ‘less’, ufachyk ‘tiny’ etc.); 2) relative adjectives call static signs of objects through relations to other objects (gyaevy ‘ideological’, kyshlyk ‘winter’, yyrtyk ‘ragged’, 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 feature, 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 derived: 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 ‘agricultural’, 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 describing: a) taste qualities: adjjy ‘bitter’, actions ‘sour’; b)weight, shape: agyr ‘heavy’, tomalak ‘round’, engil ‘easy’; c) temperature: suvuk ‘cold’, issy ‘warm’, syjik ‘hot’; d)sense of smell: chuluk ‘rotten’; e) touch: tyuz ‘smooth, even’, tagiz ‘smooth (smooth)’; f) auditory perception: tynyk ‘deaf, not loud’ , yavash ‘quiet’; kyaryk ‘hoarse’; g) visual perception: colors: yesil ‘green’, kara ‘black’, sarah‘yellow’, mavs ‘blue’, kyrmyzy ‘red’, beyaz ‘white’; size: ken ‘wide’, uzun ‘long’, tar ‘narrow’, kysk ‘short’, balaban ‘big’, ufa ‘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’, fukyare ‘poor’; 4) emotional properties, states and attitudes: inat ‘stubborn’, korkak ‘cowardly’, edepsis ‘ill-mannered’, sabyrly ‘patient’; 5) ethical and aesthetic evaluation: chirkin ‘ugly’, narin ‘elegant’, cert , kabah ‘rough’; 6) general assessment: jan ‘new’, esky ‘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: current ‘sated’, ah ‘hungry’; 9) emotional states: shen ‘joyful’, gyamly ‘sad’, and 10) socio-intellectual spheres: akyll ‘smart’, ankav ‘stupid’, iradeli ‘strong-willed’, iradesiz ‘weak-willed’ etc.

The lexical corpus of qualitative adjectives of the Crimean Tatar language is diverse in its etymological and word-formation features. Qualitative non-derivative adjectives form the core of this lexico-grammatical class: temiz ‘clean’, kara ‘black’ etc. Derived adjectives with the meaning of the intensity of the attribute can also be attributed to nuclear adjectives (mas-mavs ‘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: heap ‘power’ > kuchlu ‘strong’, kesmek ‘cutting’ > keskin ‘acute’ and others.

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, and do not enter into antonymic relations. In the Crimean Tatar language, instead of the construction "relative adjective + noun", isafet constructions (I isafet) are often used, for example.: demir kyapi (letters. ‘iron door’) instead of demirli kaps ‘iron door’ with the same meaning.

The main lexical corpus of relative adjectives is represented by morphological derivatives: ilim ‘science’ > ilmiy‘scientific’, oz ‘himself’ > 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’, khanatsyz ‘wingless’ etc.; 3) temporary y e and spatial features: afta lyk‘weekly’, tarladaki ‘field ’, byltyrki ‘last year’, etc.; 4) a sign in relation to the action: koterinki ‘raised’, kyzgyn ‘hot, incandescent’, bogujy ‘suffocating’ and others.

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 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.