TÜRK LEHÇELERİNİN DİL EVRENSELLERİ (TİPOLOJİLERİ) ÜZERİNE BİR DENEME

Lahiri and Plank (2009) want linguistic universals to be true not for the languages we know, but for every variety of every known language (dialect/mouth, 'dialect', social class language 'sociolect', individual language 'idiolect', style of language, grammar and words used in particular situations 'register'). According to them, there are no dialect universals, which are intended to apply only to dialects, unlike the universals of standard languages. The researchers note that this does not mean that there will be no universals for possible deviations from the norm in dialects, but that this (the reason why) will be a diachronic issue. As it is known, many classifications have been made on Contemporary Turkish Dialects. Based on these classifications, it is generally accepted that CTL is divided into four main branches as Oghuz Group, Karluk Group, Kipchak Group and Siberian Group (Tavkul, 23-32). In this paper, the examples of the 'affirmative question conjugation of the modal of necessity' (Ersoy, 2021) of the 18 currently written dialects of the Turkic language (Turkish, Gagauz Turkish, Azerbaijani Turkish, Turkmen Turkish, Uzbek Turkish, New Uyghur Turkish, Kazakh Turkish, Kyrgyz Turkish, Karakalpak Turkish, Nogai Turkish, Karachay-Balkar Turkish, Crimean Turkish, Tatar Turkish, Bashkir Turkish, Kumuk Turkish, Tuva Turkish, Khakass Turkish and Altai Turkish) will be processed into a table and the ways in which the dialects meet the linguistic universals (typological features) will be determined simultaneously (taking into account all kinds of deviations/differences) and the result will also be compared with the existing (traditional) dialect classification. The result thus obtained can be expected to contribute to dialect universals (typologies).