© Media Watch 11 (4) 728-735, 2020
ISSN 0976-0911 | e-ISSN 2249-8818
Problems of Modality in Turkic and Kazakh Languages
Kunipa Akhatovna Ashinova1, Bibigul Tursynovna Sydykova2,
Yuliya Nauryzbayevna Khozhalepessova3, &
Maral Kazkenovna Murzagaliyevà4
1,3,4Kazakh Ablai Khan University of International Relations
and World Languages, Republic of Kazakhstan
2Zhetysu State University, Republic of Kazakhstan
The present article aims to study the modal words in Turkic and Kazakh languages. The importance of the research topic is explained by the fact that language is a necessary means of communication and influencing people on their activities and behaviors. Determining the category of modality has been done relying on the materialist theory of language. The authors support the position of linguists like Vinogradov that every sentence contains a message about reality and the speaker’s attitude towards it. Therefore, the current study’s fundamental methodological notion is that each sentence has an element of modality. As mentioned above, the ideal attributes to modality’s emotional expression such as surprise, indignation, and joy. The comparative method for Turkic and Kazakh languages concerning modality description was widely applied. The modality features in a sentence were determined, a general analysis of the modality in the sentence was done, and the means of expression of modality was specified. Modal words in the Kazakh language, by their nature of use and in Turkic languages, are very diverse and multifaceted. It is clear from linguistic facts that they can be used as synonyms for each other. They are also different in form. The study may be used by philologists and anyone interested in modality specifically within the Turkic and Kazakh language paradigm or/and other languages. Such research was first performed concerning the Turkic and Kazakh languages.
Keywords: Kazakh language, modality, modal words, moods, sentence, the Turkic language
Amanzholov S.A. (1940). A short course on the syntax of the Kazakh language in scientific coverage. Publishing house of the Kazakh branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences, Alma-Ata, 98-99.
Balakayev M.B. (1954). Modern Kazakh language. Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR, 431-432.
Balli Sh. (1955). General linguistics and questions of the French language. Moscow, IL ed., 44.
Baskakov N.A. (1951). Karakalpak language II (particles and modal words). Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 477-482.
Grech N.I. (1827). Practical Russian grammar. Saint Petersburg, SPB, 391-409.
Janpeyisov E.N. (1958). Modal words in the modern Kazakh language. PhD thesis, Moscow, 71.
Kazem-Bek M. (1889). Grammar of the Turkish and Tatar languages. Kazan., 290-306, 365-374.
Kenesbayev S.K. (1956). Grammar of the Kazakh language. Alma-Ata, Part I, 72-73, 161-162.
Kharitonov L.N. (1943). Unchangeable words in the Yakut language. Yakutsk, 74-77.
Kononov A.N. (1956). Grammar of the modern Turkish literary language (particles and modal words). Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Moscow-Leningrad, 248-251, 355, 506-510.
Kratzer A. (1981). The notional category of modality. In Hans-Jürgen Eikmeyer & Hannes Rieser (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 38–74.
Lomonosov M.V. (1799). Russian grammar. Moscow, 28.
Mamanov I.E. (1949). Auxiliary verb in the Kazakh language. Alma-Ata, 79-81.
Marx K., Engels F. (1975). Collected Works, IV, 435.
Musabaev G.G. (1954). Modern Kazakh language. Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the Kazakh SSR, 19, 24.
Palmer F.R. (1986). Mood and Modality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 24, 1, 243.
Perevlessky P.M. (1869). Practical Russian Grammar, Part III. Syntax drawing. SPB, 502.
Potebnja A.A. (1889). From notes on Russian grammar, I – II, 367-370.
Racova A. (2008). The voluntaries modality in Bengali. Asian and African Studies, 17(2), 137-154.
Salkie R. (1988). Mood and modality by F. R. Palmer. Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 240-243.
Sauranbayev N.T. (1948). The system of complex sentences in the Kazakh language. Alma-Ata, 6.
Sauranbayev N.T. (1953). Complex sentence system in the Kazakh language. Alma-Ata, 124-135.
Shabalin V.F. (1955). On the question of expressing the category of modality in the Russian language. PhD thesis abstract, Leningrad, 16.
Shakhmatov A.A. (1941). Syntax of the Russian language. Moscow, 481.
Trentyev M.A. (1875). Turkish, Persian, Kyrgyz and Uzbek grammar. Book 1, St. Petersburg, 86.
Ubryatova E.I. (1950). Research on the syntax of the Yakut language (Modal words in the Yakut sentence). Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 281-294.
Vinogradov, V.V. (1950). On the category of modality and modal words in Russian. Proceedings of the Institute of the Russian Language. Academy of Sciences of the USSR, II, 41.
Ashinova Kunipa Akhatovna is an Associate Professor in the Foreign Languages Training Center at the Kazakh Ablai Khan University of International Relations and World Languages, Republic of Kazakhstan. Her academic interests focouses on applied linguistics and language research.
Bibigul Tursynovna Sydykova is an Associate Professor in the Department of Pedagogy at Zhetysu State University named after Ilyas Zhansugurov, Republic of Kazakhstan. Her academic interests are in psychology and pedagogy.
Yuliya Nauryzbayevna Khozhalepessova is an Associate Professor in the Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics at Kazakh Ablai khan University of International Relations and World Languages, Republic of Kazakhstan. Her research interests are philology and secondary names in the anthroponomy of Eastern peoples.
Correspondence to: Kunipa Akhatovna Ashinova, Department of Translation and Intercultural Communication, Kazakh Ablai Khan University of International Relations and World Languages, Muratbaeva Str., 200, Almaty-050 022, Republic of Kazakhstan.
© 2020 by the author. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits any use, reproduction, and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed properly. The article may be reused without special permission provided that the original article is properly attributed. The reuse of an article does not imply prior approval by the authors or Media Watch.