The terminal thematic base, glossed as 〈term〉, is expressed by markers of the type {-DỊ}. It is a non-intraterminal and non-postterminal finite category, thus the least qualified (‘anaspectual’) category in the system. As noted (§ 31.1), it presents the event directly and as a whole, but it is not adterminal in the sense of perfectives, which envisage the event at the point where the relevant limit of its actional content is attained.

Turkic languages possess numerous interjections, expressive exclamations mostly consisting of single words. They may stand in isolation, forming self-contained utterances, but are often placed before sentences and followed by a pause. They can also occur as parenthetical elements inserted into sentences. The interjections constitute a heterogeneous category, which partly overlaps with others. Some interjections are indistinguishable from adverbs. It is difficult to establish crosslinguistic equivalents in a systematic way. Interjections of Arabic-Persian origin occur in all Turkic languages of the Islamic cultural sphere. Most other interjections vary considerably. Polysyllabic interjections tend to be accentuated on their first syllable (Chapter 50).

This chapter deals with Turkic quantifiers and numerals of various classes.

The grammatical expression of numerous concepts has been discussed in previous chapters. The present chapter contains a few brief synopses of alternative functional devices at different linguistic levels.

The Turkic optative fulfills a wide range of functions developed along various diachronic paths. It is a modal category with volitional, deontic, and epistemic functions, maybe originally with a previsional meaning of predetermination ordained by a higher force, i.e. divine decree or fate. Common to all Turkic optatives are volitional notions of will, wish, desire, hope, expectation, aspiration, purpose, incitement, inducement, invocation, and promise. These notions have often led to deontic and epistemic notions of potentiality, prediction, obligation, necessity, and counterfactuality. The use of the optative to express deontic modality has given rise to senses of epistemic modality, a well-known typological path of development. Compare the use of the modern English auxiliary ‹may› both for strong wishes, e.g. ‹May X act›, and for deontic and epistemic possibility, e.g. ‹X may act›. The overall functions are similar to those of the old Indo-European optative, an irrealis modality expressing wish, possibility, necessity, etc. Some Turkic optatives have also been employed as conditionals.

This chapter provides basic facts about the individual languages of the Turkic-speaking world and their localities in greatly varying surroundings.

A verbal phrase consists of a verbal head as a finite or nonfinite predicate, preceded by one or more dependents functioning as complements, adjuncts, or secondary predicatives (depictives). Complements are internal arguments, realized as obligatory (nuclear) constituents, whereas adjuncts are optional (extranuclear) constituents. On secondary predicatives see § 54.6. Postverbial constructions, as discussed in Chapter 29, constitute a special case, since they employ limited sets of grammaticalized second verbs, e.g. Turkish ‹gid|ip dur-› ‘to keep going’.

Previous chapters dealt with the Proto-Turkic sound structure and its subsequent development. Numerous phenomena mentioned above will be reconsidered in a diachronic perspective, with renewed reference to some data that are worthy of repetition. As noted in § 3.2, Proto-Turkic stands for the earliest reconstructible hypothetical stage, a common ancestor language, existing prior to the separation of Common Turkic and Oghur Turkic, long before the stage mirrored in the oldest available sources (Róna-Tas 1998b: 69–72; Johanson 1998a: 89–106). Old Turkic is certainly not identical to Proto-Turkic, not even chronologically close to it, but it nonetheless provides the most valuable material for reconstructions.

Nouns take on certain inflectional markers, combined according to specific agglutinative rules. Common Turkic follows the ordering number-possessive-case, e.g. Tatar ḳị̈z-lar-ị̈m-nan, Turkish ‹kız|lar|ım|dan› 〈girl-pl-poss1sg-abl〉 ‘from my daughters’. Chuvash displays, like some other Transeurasian languages, the ordering possessive-number-case, e.g. χịr-ịm-sän-ǰän ‹хӗр|ӗм|сен|чен› 〈girl-poss1sg-pl-abl〉 ‘from my daughters’. Substantivized adjectives take on noun inflection, e.g. Kirghiz ǰaḳšï-lar-dị̈ ‹жакшы|лар|ды› 〈good-pl-acc〉 ‘(the) good ones’, Turkish ‹ölü|ler|imiz|e› 〈dead-pl-poss1pl-dat〉 ‘to our deceased ones’.

Turkic languages have various sociolinguistic status, spheres of use, and degrees of vitality and viability.

Turkic finite verbal predicates function as heads of main clauses. They contain grammatical information concerning person, number, viewpoint aspect, modality, and tense. By contrast, nonfinite verbal predicates, i.e. action nominals, participant nominals, and converbs, serve as heads of nonmain clauses, which occur embedded as parts of main clauses.

Turkic is rich in nonfinite verbals employed as predicates heading nonmain (embedded, subordinate) clauses and carrying bound conjugational markers, subjunctors.

Turkic nonmain clauses are subordinate clauses containing nonfinite predicates and embedded in superordinate (‘matrix’) clauses as modifiers to verbal or nominal heads. They comprise the following types

The Turkic-speaking world, Turcia (see Map 3.1), comprises a great number of languages distributed across a huge geographical area. Turkic is one of the largest language families in the world in terms of territorial extension.

Besides synthetic derivation of deverbal verb stems, Turkic languages have developed systems of analytic derivation, postverbial constructions consisting of a lexical verb in converbial form followed by an auxiliary verb of a restricted class (Johanson 1971, 1995a, 1995b, 1998b, 2000c, 2002a, 2011b). These constructions have largely replaced the old synthetic actional markers. They express actionality (‘Aktionsart’), operating on various types of verbs and actional phrases, modifying their intrinsic actional values, and describing the manner of action in differentiated ways. They are often called ‘descriptive constructions’. In terminologies that do not distinguish between aspect and actionality, they are described as serving ‘aspectual composition’ with auxiliary verbs functioning as ‘aspect verbs’.

Various copular devices are used with Turkic nominal predicates including nominal verb forms: (1) subject person-number agreement suffixes, (2) copular verbs, and (3) copular particles.

The Turkic necessitative modality expresses necessity, obligation, and inevitability, and can signal that an event is bound, due, destined, expected, or likely to occur. English translation equivalents include ‹must›, ‹to have to›, ‹to have got to›, ‹should›, ‹ought to›, ‹to be bound to›.

Almost all Turkic varieties have introduced focal intraterminals, mostly through further grammaticalization of certain postverbial constructions. They combine with actional contents of various kinds (Johanson 2000c).

Copular particles combine with various thematic bases, thus participating in the formation of numerous analytic constructions expressing aspectual, modal, evidential, and temporal concepts, e.g. Turkish distant ‹i|di›, evidential ‹i|miș›, conditional ‹i|se›. Most of them have been mentioned in section § 27.5.