ISSN 0798 1015

Vol. 38 (Nº 25) Year 2017. Page 5

Functional Semantics of the Voice in the Kazakh Language

Semántica funcional de la voz en lengua kazaja

Anarkul SALKYNBAY 1; Nazyken YEGIZBAYEVA 2; Shaigul RAMAZANOVA 3; Gaziza IMANALIYEVA 4; Zhazira ABDRAKHMANOVA 5

Received: 09/03/2017 • Approved: 15/04/2017

Content

1. Introduction and novelty

2. Data about the methodology of the research

3. Experimental part, analysis, generalization and explanation of the data or comparison of theories

4. The active/passive voice

5. Active/passive voice – the importance of the opposition

6. The initial definition of the opposition of the active/passive voice

7. Conclusions and recommendations

References

1. Introduction and novelty.

Different aspects and directions appear and develop at the moment in the field of functional grammar. Research works are held by theoretical problems of functional grammar, the functional-syntactical conception and functional aspectualization. The main theories of modern functional grammar are considered in the Russian linguistics in scientific works of Shelyakin M.A. (2001), Khrakovski W. S. (2002), Zolotova G.А. (2001), Bondarko А. W. (2013), in the research work “Communicative parameters of grammar and text” (2016).

Functional grammar is a new field in the Kazakh linguistics. Its main theoretical core and direction are being identified. In the field of functional syntax we can name the research work of Z.K. Akhmetzhanova, where the main principles of functional research in the Kazakh and Russian languages are considered (Аkhmetzhanova, 2005), and also the research work of А. Salkynbay, where the author (Salkynbay, 2015) considers the semantic direction of the active voice in poems of Abai Kunanbaev. That is why to study the category of voice from functional-semantic point in the Kazakh language is very important.

The main aim of the article is to analyze scientifically the category of voice from functional-semantic point in the Kazakh Language and to identify the expression of the active and passive voices. The principles of the functions of lexical and grammatical units in conveying a particular message in everyday communication are identified.

In traditional grammar of the Kazakh Language the term “voice” is identified as the relation between the subject and object of the action, the verb category is formed by the particular system of prefixes. In traditional grammar the term voice is used to identify grammar category based on a definite system of grammar forms. (morphological and syntactical).

To analyze the function and meaning of the voice from functional point of view we consider the term voice together with such concepts as aspect, temporal, modal, personal. The term is used to emphasize the functional-semantical field, to identify the linguistic means, which express the voice relations of different levels (morphological, word-building, syntactical, lexical-syntactical, lexical).

Function and functional-semantical peculiarity of the category of the voice in terms of personal and impersonal use in the Kazakh Language is being researched for the first time.

2. Data about the methodology of the research

In General Linguistics the term voice (Greek. dіathesіs) is described as grammar category, which identifies the relation between the subject and object, But there is no full characterization of this concept. The voice system of any language includes “the main, true, active” morphological form. Here the subject of the action is in common case functions as a subject of the sentence, and the object functions as a direct object.

The voice in General Linguistics as well as in the Russian Linguistics is being deeper researched from the functional aspect. Since this problem was not considered in the Kazakh Linguistics we use the terms according to the concepts based on the works of Russian linguists. In order to explain some concepts we try to analyze them in comparison with the Russian Language.

There are many peculiarities of the analysis of voice as functional-semantic category. First of all, the active and passive forms of the voice are identified. For example, in the Russian Language in sentences “The workers are building a house” and “The house is being built” the category of voice is identified. If we translate this sentence into the Kazakh Language, it will be translated as “The workers are building a house”. In the passive voice the subject of the action in the Russian Language in the “Instrumental Case” will be the object of the action and the object will be in the “Common Case” as a subject of the sentence. For example, “The house is being built by workers”). But if we take into consideration the peculiarities of the Kazakh Language, it is impossible to translate this sentence into the Kazakh Language as “The house is being built by workers”. It will be translated using such syntactical structures as “The house is built” or “The building of the house is finished”, “The house has been built”. Such discussions in modern Kazakh linguistics whether the category of manner of the action (the category of completeness/incompleteness) is characteristic or not for the Kazakh language are taking place because of the lack of analyses of some linguistic means in traditional grammar. In fact, analyzing the linguistic means in the Kazakh Language one can come to the conclusion that there is category of completeness/incompleteness in the Kazakh Language. This problem will be identified and proved in this research.

In order to identify theoretical base of functional grammar based on the concept field there appears the necessity of research of the functional-meaning field. While identifying the field in functional-meaning groups it is important to research voice category because of the character of the action concerning the subject and object of the action. The character of the action is connected with the definite element in the syntactic structure of the semantic subject and semantic object. This characteristic feature of the above-considered field gives the opportunity to research this field by dividing them into functional-semantic groups. This structure is called “the voice”.

Thus, the voice is identified as the structure of functional-meaning field. In this structure subject and object are recognized as a semantic category and it includes linguistic means of different levels describing the actions concerning the subject and object. These semantic categories correspond to a definite element in the syntactic structure of the sentence. This structure is composed of the field of the active and passive voices, reflexive verbs. The peculiarities of the verb are identified in each of these functional-meaning fields.

The term voice identifies not only functional-meaning fields including linguistic means, but also it considers the category being the base for the integration of linguistic means. The voice is considered to be the category, which describes the action concerning the subject and object corresponding to the elements in the syntactic structure of the sentence.

The relation between the verb and the noun corresponds to the relation between the subject and the object. That is why all the forms of the voice describe the relation between the verb and the subject. According to the fact that predication is characteristic both to the subject and the object the phenomenon of active and passive forms are identified. Getting the reflective character of the voice depends on recognizing the predicate as an action. In this case the person is recognized as the owner of the predicative sign in the sentence structure that is the subject or object of the action.

If the action doer is both the subject and the object at the same time, the predicate can be considered to be common. The intransitivity of the verb depends on the recognition of the action directed to the object as a predicate. It should be taken into consideration the fact that the intransitivity of the verb is caused by the meaning of the lexeme. For example, the verb consider has an intransitive character that it means to examine, see, and view an object or action (to consider a problem, to consider a textbook, etc.). But the form is considered (the passive form built from an intransitive verb) becomes a transitive verb.

There are different scientific points of view about the division of the verbs into transitive and intransitive ones in traditional grammar studies. Although transitivity and intransitivity are defined by the root of the verb and by the endings of the voice, it is mainly a linguistic phenomenon defined by the word combination.

That is why we consider it not only as a grammatical category, but also as a semantic category, which is expressed by root morphemes.

In Turkic linguistics there are some analyses concerning the concept of voice. In research works held in structural aspect it was stated that functional characteristics of the voice supposed to be complicated. The voice as a word-builder has the function to identify the relation between the subject and the object of the action.

It is more essential to indicate the main peculiarities of the voice before identifying functional semantic structure of the voice forms.

The voice forms express the relation between the action and the subject and the object.

• The voice forms cannot be used for any verb root, they can be used only in accordance with the valence of the meaning.
• The voice forms can transform the transitive verb into the intransitive verb, or the intransitive verb into the transitive verb.
•  The voice does not only describe the relation between the subject and the object of the action. Because it is known that from denoting-conceptional aspect the subject is the doer of the action, and the action itself is connected with the object. It is about the fact that the subject and the object are semantic categories in the syntactic structure of the sentence, which correspond to some linguistic units. According to traditional terminology, it is the subject or the direct or indirect object. In other words, they are syntactic actants or predicative actants. Thus, “to acknowledge the subject and the object as semantic categories in the syntactic structure of the sentence corresponding to some linguistic units” includes the concept the diathesis (voice).

3. Experimental part, analysis, generalization and explanation of the data or comparison of theories.

In General linguistics the concept diathesis was introduced by А.А. Kholodovitsch. He used a special metalanguage using this while describing the participants of the action (the subject, the object, the means, the initial point, the last point, the addressee) also he described the participants using a special syntactic language. They were considered as parts of the sentence (the subject, direct object, indirect object etc.). The author used the term “diathesis” to name the similarities identified between these two groups. (Kholodovitsch, 1979). According to А.А. Kholodovitsch voice is “the diathesis expressed by the verb in grammatical form” (Kholodovitsch, 1979).

The diathesis of the voice in the sentence can be identified as a complex of functional elements characteristic of the lexeme of the voice form and as a complex of the syntactic signs of the linguistic structural elements, that surround the voice forms. It is normal that there are different explanations in discussing the relations of the voice. Having analyzed the links of the voice forms we have concluded that it is necessary to differentiate the form describing the intransitivity of the action and the form describing the transitivity of the action, i.e. to estimate the form of voice link or form of the “true voice”.

According to the researchers, from functional point of view among the fields of the voice the field active voice/passive voice is very important. We have decided to connect the active participation of the subject in the action with the function of the voice and to call it active voice. The use of the term “active voice” depends on the use of the sign in its main function.

We also use the term “passive voice” to describe the replacement of the subject by the object, i.e. the action is performed not by the subject, but by the object of the action. Because here the sign is used not in its main function. We take into consideration the fact that its meaning in the context is identified by the function of the sign in the sentence.

The semantics and forms of active and passive voice is used in different aspects in expressing reflective character, common features, and the active voice characteristics/passive voice characteristics. For instance, the meanings expressing reflective character and the common features may be given only in the active voice structures. In this case the verb lexemes can be both intransitive and transitive, and in the passive voice structures (including the passive voice and reflexive verbs) can be used only transitive verbs. The transitivity and intransitivity of the verb lexemes depend on passive forms, e.g.: solve (compare: The problemis being solved; the problem has been solved), but these forms can be transitive verbs by themselves. In the traditional grammar, the transformation of transitive verbs into intransitive verbs by means of grammar forms has been scientifically and systematically analyzed.

 The fields of active/passive voice in the Kazakh language differs from other functional fields of voice by the distinct grammaticalization.

4. The active/passive voice

This unit deals with the voice forms and the complex of problems concerning the content and structure of the researched field. The object of the analysis is the relation of semantic content of differences between sentence structure and active voice/passive voice. It is necessary to identify the connection of the relation between active/passive voice with the aspectualization, tacsis, modality, person and subject/object.

5. Active/passive voice – the importance of the opposition

It is impossible to give a common definition to all linguistic means concerning the opposition of active/passive voice in order to identify the whole process. That is why we tend to think it is more reasonable to give the definition to the central structure of this opposition, which contains its most important features. We take as such a structure, which consists of the subject and the predicate. Because this structure reflects both the content peculiarities and its morphological and syntactic features. We take into consideration the fact that there is a tradition in General Linguistics to choose this structure as central part of the sentence.

6. The initial definition of the opposition of the active/passive voice

The field active/passive voice is the linguistic means that is to be found in different levels of any language. (first of all, morphological, and syntactic, and then lexical). This means is used to describe the relation of the action to the subject and the object: in the active voice – the action starts by the subject, the subject is reflected in the position of the subject of the sentence; in the passive voice the subject is not reflected in the same position . It is replaced by the object. For example, 1) The khan issued a law; 2) The law is issued. In the first sentence the word “khan” is the subject, in the second sentence the information expressed by the subject is conveyed by the object and has another marking. However, the speaker can easily understand from the context that the action doer and the subject is “khan”.

This structure of the active voice (subject-predicate) is focused on the subject, while the structure of the passive voice is focused on the object. According to this, we can judge that the predicate of the active voice is initially subject oriented, respectively the predicate of the passive voice is initially object oriented. These features of the active voice/passive voice are called in some scientific works action of end direction (in the active voice) and action of central direction (in the passive voice).

As many researchers in General linguistics have stated the importance of the passive voice depends on the replacement of the subject of the sentence from the central position . It is replaced by the object. The predicate is the direction of the action, its feature depends on whether it is active or passive, the predicative sign of the subject or the object, or the initial position.

The replacement of the subject from the central position by the object is a common fact. For example, the author may not pay attention to the form of the word, but can express his/her opinion this way: Instead of saying We consider this concept … He/She cansayThis concept is considered by us…

The action (in full meaning) expresses not only the action. (He/she had smb. taught), it can also expressthe state. (He/she made smb. tired), it can express the relation too. (Alan had smth. by smb. done).

The subject is meant as a category containing different features and forms as an action doer. The concept subject in this meaning also includes individual functions. Using the term subject in this meaning is identified by its other functions. For instance, agens of controlled and uncontrolled actions. (He/she held. and He/she ) stumbled;

The agens given in the accusative case in the passive voice is always controlled agens. (These problems are not considered), the owner of the state(Askar was taken.), the owner of the relation (These questions were included into the range of issues).

The object is the participant of the action or the action is directed to it. It is meant as a semantic category to identify the target of the action. The concept object is also used to identify individual functions. For example, forming of a particular target, its fulfillment, its different states, its movement, the change of its features etc.

The feature of predicate whether it is active or passive depends on position of the subject and object in the sentence. The active feature of the subject-predicate structures depends on high-level position of the subject as a subject in the sentence. Moreover, the object (if there is one) gets the position of direct or indirect object.

In general, this interpretation of the peculiarities between the active and passive voice in subject-predicate sentences does not contradict to the rules of the voice in which the attention is paid to “the relation of the action verb to the whole sentence structure”. In this point, the above given concept corresponds to the conception about the diathesis and the voice. To identify the peculiarities between the active and passive voice means the analysis of “the central ”, i.e. the sentence containing the subject-predicate structure.

Now let us go to the sentences without any subject, but which possess the predicative sign.

The concept about the owner of the predicative sign is a broader concept than the subject. It includes the elements containing the predicative signs except the subject. As an example we can take the sentences which possess the predicative signs.

In the structure of personal sentences: Assan was accomodated.; I was made to say about him. The predicative sign is to be seen from the structure of the sentence. In this sentence structure a semantic subject corresponds to the predicative sign. The combination with the direct object, being a reflexive verb or nonreflexive verb give the possibility to consider such personal sentence structures as the active voice. Thus, the correspondence “subject –predicative sign” is necessary to analyze voice phenomenon. The concept of predicative sign is used in sentences without any subject, in imperative sentences (e.g.: Enter, please!), in sentences consisting of particles and in general-personal sentences (e.g.: Can talk face-to-face.). It is used with the predicate in the form of general verb. Here the predicative sign corresponds to the subject of the sentence. The use of the concept of predicative sign is beneficial in sentences where the active and passive participle forms are used together with the nouns. For example, We told this news is for the person ...; The problem studied in the book… and etc. From such sentence structures we can identify the fact that the semantic object and semantic subject correspond to the predicative sign.

It is possible to identify the features of the subject with the help of the predicative sign. There is a possibility to find out in what person, in what tense the predicate is.

 If the number of any verb lexemes, features of which are already known, has been theoretically identified, the number of available diatheses and the availability of voice forms of the verb will be identified only in practice. The corresponding kinds of diatheses and forms of one verb lexeme are found between two poles: (а) each diathesis is marked by a special verb form, the number of the voice equals to the number of diathesis; (b) all diatheses are marked by one verb form, the diatheses are not specially marked in the verb, that is why there is no voice form there.

It is necessary to clarify the concept of the content structure of the verb lexeme. We think that the verb lexeme names a particular state and tends to be the predicate being connected with its arguments by the semantic valence. The argument adjusts the level of the relation that is why one can suppose that they have an individual semantic function.

Thus, each participant of the state called a particular verb lexeme possess a special semantic function. For example, the participants of the state with the verb give: Х gives U to Z – here the roles are divided the following way: Х – the person who gives, U – the thing which is given, Z – the person who takes. Instead of give can be used such actions as to gift, to send, to present. In general, there appears the state to pass something from one person to another. Such phenomenon is characteristic to any language. Having analyzed common states we can identify such roles of the participants: the participant, the performer, the recipient, the instrument or the means, the place, the aim, the reason and etc.

According to the exact aim of the research, one can unite the roles of the first, second and other participants, who participate in the state with different verbs, into the group of the main roles. We would like to explain this idea by analyzing the verbs to send and to take. Let us analyze the sentence Serik was made to send a letter by Arman. The statewhich is expressed by the verb corresponds to the first participant i.e. the sender Serik, who has the role of the performer. This state might have been created for one purpose. The purpose of the agens: Arman made Serik send a letter in order to invite him to his house. In the sentence Serik took the letter from Arman. We cannot call Arman the agens, because he does not create this action. Arman does not have any purpose in this case, thus, if we transform the sentence into the purpose and complicate it, we face a contradiction concerning the meaning: Serik took a letter from Arman in order to invite him to his house. That is why it is appropriate for him to have the function of a recipient. These two sentences also have the structure of the passive voice: The letter was sent by Serik from Arman, and The letter was taken from Serik. In these sentences the roles of the first participant can be evaluated as one main role and it can be called the subject. And the second participant’s role can be evaluated as another main role and be called the object. Of course, it is evident that in this case the information delivery by the main roles would be not enough. But the transformation from the main role to the real meaningful role will not cause any difficulties.

7. Conclusions and recommendations

To sum everything up, as a result of the scientific analysis of the functional semantics in the category of voice in the Kazakh language according to the aim of the article, it was found out that the voice category has a complicated nature, that the main peculiarities of the functional-semantic features were closely connected with its character whether it is active or passive. The rules concerning the functions of the lexical and grammatical units used in everyday speech to convey any kind of information have been identified by means of the category of voice. We have dealt with the function and meaning of the category of voice, in analyzing the inner essence of the category of voice from the functional aspect, we have considered the term voice together with such concepts aspectualization, temporality, modality.

The concept of predicative sign is recognized as a unit containing functional-structural features, because any active syntactic structure has a syntactic function. If the predicative sign is used as the subject or the attribute in the position of the main part of the sentence, its function can be expressed by a noun or a pronoun. If the predicative sign is not reflected in the sentence structure, its reflection will be identified by the form of the predicate.

The structural function of the predicative sign is very important for the meaning of the category of voice. If such a function identifies the form of the category of active voice, it expresses the predicate-subject direction and if it identifies the form of the passive voice, it expresses the initial-object direction.

We can use the concept predicative sign while identifying the peculiarities between the active or passive voice: in the active voice the action starts from the subject or the subject in the position of the owner of the predicative sign; in the passive voice the subject is replaced from its position by the object.

Finally, the active voice identifies the owner of the predicative sign as a subject, in the passive voice the owner of the predicative sign is identified as an object.

References

Аkhmetzhanova, Z.К. (2005). Contrastive linguistics. Аlmaty: Publishing house КаzUWLandIR named after Abylai Khan, p. 401.

Bondarko, А. V. (2013). Principles of functional grammar and problems of aspectology. Publishing house: “Librocom”.

Communicative-notional parameters of grammar and text. (2016). Publishing house: “Еditorial URSS”.

Khrakovski, V. S. (2002). The Russian Language in the mirror of typology: novations in imperative paradigm. The Russian language in scientific coverage, 2(4), 98.

Kholodovitsch А.А. (1979). Problems of grammar theory. Moscow: Science, p. 304.

Salkynbay, A.B. (2015). Lingvopoetika of Abai’s words. Аlmaty: Kazakh universiteti, p. 241.

Shelyakin, М.А. (2001). Functional grammar of the Russian Language. Мoscow: The Russian language.

Zolotova, G.А. (2001). Grammar as a science about human being. The Russian language in scientific coverage, 1, 110.

1. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 050040, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 71 al-Farabi Ave. Email: asalkbek@mail.ru

2. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 050040, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 71 al-Farabi Ave

3. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 050040, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 71 al-Farabi Ave

4. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 050040, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 71 al-Farabi Ave

5. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University, 050040, Republic of Kazakhstan, Almaty, 71 al-Farabi Ave