Abstract

Abstract
The Azerbaijani Turkish language, due to its proximity to the Persian language, has been influenced by it; not only lexical units but also grammatical elements have entered the borrowing language and have subsequently undergone phonological, semantic, and syntactic changes (Mahmoudi, 2021, p.3). One of the elements that has entered Azerbaijani Turkish is the particle ki. In Azerbaijani Turkish, the element ki is used not only as a relative pronoun and complementizer but also as a focus marker. In this study, we will first examine the particle ke in Persian, and then analyze its representation in the target language, Azerbaijani Turkish. After analyzing its discourse function as a focus marker, we will draw tree diagrams for it based on the Minimalist Program.
Key words: Azeri Turkish, focalization, focus, focus marker, topicalization

Introduction

Azerbaijani Turkish also uses a focus marker to indicate the prominence of a given constituent. In the following, we will focus solely on the representation of the focus marker kɪ in Azerbaijani Turkish. This study aims to answer the following questions: "What is the representation of the focus marker kɪ in Azerbaijani Turkish?" and "Is the movement of a constituent to the beginning of the sentence in Azerbaijani Turkish for focalization or topicalization?"

Materials & Methods

In this study, the representation of the element ki in Azerbaijani Turkish was investigated. For data collection, plays, series, and films in Turkish broadcast on the local Ishraq network of Zanjan were used. Every sentence containing the element ki was extracted and categorized based on the linguistic intuition of the authors. As will be discussed in the data analysis section, the element ki in Azerbaijani Turkish can function both as a complementizer and as a relative pronoun. Also, similar to Persian, ki can act as a focus marker; it can attach to multiple constituents and focus them in situ. An interview method was also used to collect data: native Zanjani speakers, particularly in the adult age range (40–70 years), were given Persian sentences containing the element (ki) and were asked to translate them into fluent Turkish. The reason younger generations were not used was that they tend to speak Persian more and are more influenced by it. To minimize this influence, the adult age group was asked to cooperate. As mentioned, both field and library methods were used in the present research. For collecting theoretical and descriptive background studies, the library method was primarily used. All transcriptions in this research were prepared according to the 2005 edition of the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA). Furthermore, the focus-marked sentences involving the element ki were analyzed within the framework of the Minimalist Program.

Discussion and Results

As outlined in the introduction and data analysis, Azerbaijani Turkish is influenced by Persian in certain respects. Various elements in Turkish are borrowed from Persian. One such borrowing is the element ki, which functions as a complementizer, relative pronoun, and focus marker. As mentioned earlier, the research data were collected from various sources, including films and local TV series from Zanjan, as well as interviews with elderly residents of Zanjan. Participants were given sentences in Persian and asked to express them fluently in Turkish. As stated in the introduction, the Persian focus marker ke can attach to any constituent—regardless of its syntactic role or information structure (whether new or given)—and highlight it (Oroji, 2012; Oroji & Rezaei, 2013). Similarly, in Azerbaijani Turkish, it was shown that the focus marker ki can attach to any constituent and highlight it. As Mahmoudi (2021) also asserts, the constituent marked with ki will carry contrastive focus. Contrastive focus is marked by the features [+new, +prominent] (Rasakh-Mohand, 2003). However, as previously shown, contrastive focus may also carry old information (Oroji, 2012). Examples and diagrams 25 to 30 demonstrated that various constituents—including subject, object, locative adverbials, temporal adverbials, and even entire sentences—can take the focus marker ki and become highlighted. Additionally, noun phrases, prepositional phrases, and verbs can be used with the ki element.

Conclusions

Thus, as in Persian (Oroji, 2012), in Turkish any constituent can be highlighted in-situ by this focus marker. Based on sentence 30, it can be said that the ki-marked constituent is first highlighted in place and then moves to the specifier position of the topic node for further prominence. This is because, beyond greater prominence, it becomes a topic, making the rest of the sentence about it (Lambrecht, 1994). That is, the topicalized constituent can also be the focus, and being a topic and focus are not mutually exclusive. However, based on the principle of linguistic economy and the application of Occam’s Razor to redundancy, and contrary to the views of Rizzi (2001) and Karimi (2005), the presence of both topic and focus nodes at the beginning of a sentence is not economical. Instead, one can assume a single functional node—the topic node—in the left periphery. The findings of this study confirm those of Oroji (2012), Oroji & Rezaei (2013), and Adrang (2019).