Comparative-Historical Analysis of the Infinitive Form in –Oov in the Turkic Languages

This paper is devoted to a comparative-historical analysis of the infinitive form ending in -oov in Modern Tur kic languages as well as in their dialects and sub-dialects. Currently a number of issues regarding the morphological semantic and functional features of infinitive forms in the Turkic languages have not received exhaust tive coverage. The experiences of study of the infinitive form ending in -oov in Turkology is analyzed, approaches to definition of its structural-semantic, syntactic features and etymology are discussed. Similar and distinctive features have been detected, as well as phonetic variants of the infinitive form ending in -oov in Modern Turkic languages. Etymological aspects of the construction are also considered in this paper. It should be noted that a systematic comparative-historical study of the grammatical elements of the modern Turkic languages takes on special significance in Turkological linguistics. In the author’s opinion, the relevance of the chosen topic is determined


Introduction 1.
A comparative-historical study of individual structural elements and grammar of the Turkic languages, in particular, infinitives, have important scientific value. A comparative study of the grammatical structure of the Turkic languages reveals differential signs in their gram-matical structures, seemingly insignificant. Some of these differences date back to past eras of development of the languages, some are the result of such tendencies in their development that have emerged at the present time. It determines the relevance of this paper and is the reason for choosing this topic.
In this paper, we used comparative-historical, descriptive research methods. The object of this paper is the infinitive form ending in -oov, which is one of the ancient infinitives in modern Turkic languages.
The category of infinitive holds a special place in the morphology of the Turkic languages. Turkological literature has a number of terms for the indication of grammatical category of the infinitive: the indefinite form of the verb, the indefinite inclination, inconclusive mood, the aim verb form, the aim verb or supine, infinitive, masdar, indefinite nominal verb form, verb-name, action name, verbal nouns etc.
The considered non-finite form of the verb in the Azerbaijani linguistics acted under the term masdar. This term began to be used in grammars of the Azerbaijani language from the 30's of the 20th century.
It is interesting to note that the term masdar, borrowed from the Arabic language, is also registered in the Georgian language. This term was founded in the works of M. Kashgary and some Eastern linguists.
In Turkology some linguists often identify concepts of the infinitive and the verbal noun (M.Huseynzadeh, A. Akhundov).
Some scholars (O. Chommadov) identInfinitive form y the concepts of verbal nouns and the action nouns (Commadov, 1992).
In Russian linguistics the most commonly used term of this non-finite form of the verb in relation to the Turkic languages was the term Infinitive.
K.G. Ishbaev's statement is most revealing on this occasion: "The term "infinitive" /lat. Infinitivus -non-finite/ does not completely corresponds the nature of this category in Turkic languages. But it is good that this term is being an international term does not require calques and is common-understandable" (Ishbayev, 1975).
We also believe that the most expedient and successful term applied to the category of the infinitive in the Turkic languages is the term "infinitive".
So far turkologists have not reached consensus about the nature of the infinitive as a separate grammatical category.
In this regard N. K. Dmitriev wrote: "...the concept of the infinitive as a grammatical category rather shaky and uncertain. The infinitive is something between conjugated verbal forms and verbal nouns. The specInfinitive form icity of the infinitive in dInfinitive form ferent languages is very dInfinitive form ferent" (6, p. 178).
From the above statements it follows that unlike some scientists, N. K. Dmitriev does not consider the infinitive as a separate grammatical category, and also does not identInfinitive form y it with verbal nouns (M. Huseynzadeh, A. Akhundov, L. Khanbutayeva).
The In the scientific work of V. Aliyev titled as "The non-conjugated forms of the verb in Azerbaijani language. Masdar, Baku, 1986" the history of the study of masdars and their paradigmatic and syntagmatic features has been carefully studied in detail (22).
In the research work titled as "Comparative-historical grammar of Turkic languages.Morphology" the infinitive is interpreted as follows: "The Infinitive, as the special verb form, calls an action, state or process, without specifying its relation to the person and number or reality" (Comparative-historical grammar of Turkic languages. Morphology, 1988).
It is interesting to note the observation of V. D. Arakin on the historical development of the infinitive in the Turkic languages: "In all likelihood, the infinitive began to take shape only after the decay of the common Turkic language on separate languages" (1, p. 483).
In our view, it is difficult to disagree with V. D. Arakin's hypothesis, which is confirmed by pretty compelling facts. Thus, V.D. Arakin argues his hypothesis by the fact of the absence of infinitive's common forms of the in modern Turkic languages, which is ascending to the one common Turkic infinitive form, and by the fact of uneven development of infinitive forms in modern Turkic languages.
In Turkic languages the infinitive is one of non-finite forms of the verb, which is characterized by morphological features, syntactic functions and defined semantics. Infinitive forms are not only different from the finite forms of the verb, but also from other non-finite forms of the verb (participle, adverbial participle).
Infinitive forms in modern Turkic languages differ among themselves, i.e. each infinitive form has some inherent similar and distinctive features.
In this paper we will discuss the structural-semantic and functional features of the infinitive form ending in -oov in the Turkic languages.
The infinitive form ending in -oov is one of the ancient infinitive forms in the Turkic languages. In this regard, N.A. Baskakov's statement is significant: "The affix -oov/-yoov in (negative form -mav/-mev), genetically rising to more ancient forms of the same affix -ig/-g, -ug/-yug/-g /-gi,-gu/-gyu, which is also remained in the Karakalpak language in the meaning of the action noun, but with a different semantic undertone" (Baskakov, 1952).
The form ending in -oov/-yoov in the most Turkic languages performs under the term "action nouns", "verb name". On this occasion, D. G. Tumasheva's statement is of special interest: "As the verbal noun in -oov most often expresses the action process and is neutral in respect to time, it is called in Turkic languages as the action noun, indefinite-nominal form of a verb, a noun with the meaning of the act, process of action or its outcome, etc. However, the matter is not only in terms; apparently, in various Turkic languages this form expresses verbal and nominal features that depends on the entire system of verbal-nominal forms of a language " (Tumasheva, 1968).
In modern Uzbek language the infinitive form ending in -oov refers to productive forms. The studied infinitive form is most common in Kipchak dialects of Uzbek language.
Infinitive form ending in -oov is a very ancient form of the Turkic languages.
In the written monuments of the old Uzbek language the form ending in -gu is most common. However, despite the fact that the above forms were historically phonetic variants of the same affix, the forms ending in (-oov) and (-goo) in modern Uzbek language are now functioning as independent affixes and perform specific functions.
In "Divan" Mahmud Kashgari is recorded cases of use of the form ending in -gu: -alive ( Kashgary, 1961).
Infinitive form ending in -oov in the Uzbek language is formed from different verbal stems: -arrival, etc. This form mainly refers to the process of action or condition, and it is also the name of action, particular occupation.
Some words with the affix in -oov moved into the category of none: -wintering, -a beast of burden, -frost, etc. It is noteworthy to note, that infinitive form ending in -oov in the modern Uzbek language is most frequently used with affixes -chi, -li (-lik), -siz,-chan.
The forms derived from the affixes -oov +chi indicates the action's or state's agent, for example: speaker, -beginner, -novice, etc. Most of words ending in -oov +chi transmit the name of the professions; the others play the role of terms denoting certain concepts of some branch of science.
For example: -writer, -determinants, identifier etc. Form ending in -oov +chi, combined with affixes in -lik, and passes the value of the distracted name of a certain profession or social status: -managing, -writing, etc. A further feature of the form -oov +-chi, +-lik draws our attention. So, this form as a noun takes the negation affix in -ma. It should also be noted that some which of these words are used only in the negative aspect, for example: -lack, -misunderstanding, etc. Note that by means of the affix ending in -oov are formed of homogeneous paired combinations, but this phenomenon has been inconsistent: --writings etc. In light of the above we can conclude that infinitive form ending in -oov in the modern Uzbek language is formed from all verbal stems; it denotes the name of a process of action or condition. This form is able to take derivational affixes and to combine with various modal words.
It is well known that the infinitive is a verb category. As we can see, substantial properties is dominated in infinitive form ending in -oov in Uzbek language. This applies not only to the form in -oov, but other infinitive forms of Uzbek language (-mok,-ish).
All this suggests that in the Uzbek language not infinitive form have substantial proper-ties, and the action nouns have the infinitive's properties.
On this basis, Uzbek scientists considered the use of the term "action nouns or condition" as the most appropriate instead of term "infinitive".
In our opinion, it is not possible to consider the category of infinitive in the Uzbek language is formed. F. Iskhakov's statement is the most revealing on this account: "A study of the basic grammatical properties of the studied forms leads us to doubt the existence of morphologically formed category of infinitive in the Uzbek language" (Iskhakov, 1960).
In the Kyrgyz language in relation to the category of the infinitive mainly used the term "action nouns". The reason for using this term is due to B. Toychubekova as follows: "...the terms "infinitive" and "verbal nouns" on the meaning that they have in the grammar, do not reveal neither semantic nor morphological entity of named forms" (Toychubekova, 1968).
Infinitive form ending in -oov in the Turkic languages have distinctive phonetic composition. Thus, unlike the above-discussed Uzbek language, in Kyrgyz language this form has a phonetic variant as -oo//-o.
Like the Uzbek language, the action noun in -oo//-o are formed from the various verbal stems: -suppose, -write, etc. The negative aspect of the form in --oo//-o is formed in two ways: syntactic, i.e. with the negative affix -ba and analytical -through negative words emes or jok.
In the Kyrgyz language the form ending in --oo//-o combined with such derivational affixes as -chy, -chy+-lyk,syz. By means of the affix -chy in combination with a form in -oo//-o nouns are formed: -writer, -rodents, etc.

206
Form ending in --oo//-o in the Kyrgyz language, taking the possessive affixes can be combined with modal words, postpositions, auxiliary words and particles.
For example: -my trip is possible, -before his coming, etc. It should be emphasized that the investigated form unlike other forms of action nouns in Kyrgyz language takes all the case affixes. So, the action nouns in -mak, -may in this language, in rare cases, are used in finitely conjugated form, and taking the genitive affixes are found in some proverbs and saying. For example: -if you go -it will be hard to come back, etc.
It is noteworthy to mention that the form in -oo//-o and the other action nouns in the Kyrgyz language mostly combined with affixes of a dative case.
A further feature of the form in -oo//-o in combination with affixes of a dative case draws our attention. So, the form in -oo//-o taking the dative affixes case, unlike other action nouns in the Kyrgyz language, can be combined with such modal words, as kerek eken -should, mumkun beken -possible, and also postpositions and particles -up yetand, etc.
Here are some examples: -have the opportunity to go, -one would have to say, etc.
Regarding the degree of productivity of a form on -oo//-o in the Kyrgyz language should be noted that this form in this language, in contrast to the modern Uzbek language is more productive.
In light of the above we come to the conclusion that the form in -oo//-o combined with affixes of dative case more in line with the category of the infinitive in other Turkic languages: -you can't write, etc. Concerning the syntactic function of the form on -oo//-o in the Kyrgyz language, it should be noted that it can act as any part of the sentence: -(proverb)-the Sowing of grain -sowing of wealth (as predicate); ! -, -I don't want to shoot the people fighting for freedom (as object) (Toychubekova, 1968).
Infinitives in the dialects and sub-dialects of the Altai language, as in the Altai literary language are not widely used. Infinitive forms in some dialects of the Altai language are isolated from the verbal system.
In most cases, these forms act as verbal nouns that have lost the ability to manage cases. For example, in the dialect of the Tubalars (Tuba-Kizhi), as well as in Kumanda dialect of Altai language the infinitive form ending in (-oo,-oov, -ug,-gu) functions as the verbal name: -trade (Baskakov, 1967), fight, etc. (Baskakov, 1966).
In the modern Karakalpak language infinitives used under the term "action nouns". The action nouns in the Karakalpak language are divided into two groups: a) the primary action nouns and b) the secondary action.
Form ending in -oov in this language refers to the primary action nouns and has a phonetic variants in -ioo, -oo: -take, -watch, etc. Like Kyrgyz, in the Karakalpak language this infinitive form belongs to more productive affixes and is formed by means of any verbal stems.
Action nouns in -ioo, -oo in the Karakalpak language take numerative, possessive and case affixes. Note that taking the possessive affixes, this form is mostly used with a modal forms , , -need, as well as with such postpositions as , , -about, for, for example: ( , ) -I have to go etc.
As we noted above, action nouns in -ioo, -oo in the Karakalpak language is actively used with the possessive affixes. It combined with affixes of nominative case, is quite often used with modal words , -need, possible. For example: -We need to go, etc. The action nouns on -ioo, -oo combined with affixes of dative-instrumental case in the Karakalpak language indicate the process, goal, status and direction of the action. For example: -he has gone to tell, etc. This construction is synonymous with the word combinations with the action nouns in the nominative case, which are combined with the postposition -for: -he left to tell. However, it should be emphasized that the value expressed by the action noun in -ioo, -oo in dative-instrumental case indistinctly traced, whereas in the nominative case this form precisely transmits the target value.
A further feature of the action nouns on -ioo, -oo in the local case draws our attention. So, taking the affixes of local case, the considered form functions as the predicate in the sentence and pass the value of continuous present tense of the verb.

207
Consider the examples: -Antireligious work is enhanced among the youth of the farm (Kutlymuratov, 1963). The infinitive form ending in -oo/-oov in the language of the Siberian Tatars is used in a phonetic variant of -oo. The form in this language takes possessive and case affixes, for example: i i -She exceeded all of insulting me, etc.
In the language of the Siberian Tatars this infinitive is regarded as a verbal name. However, in a separate case, this form is semantically close to the infinitive.
The infinitive undertone has been more clearly seen in the case of a combination of this form with the affixes of dative-instrumental case or with modal words -, i -need.

Consider the examples:
i i i -Our carpenters went to work in another place; i , i i -It is hot, we need to pull the ducks (on the lake), etc. (Tumasheva, 1968).
A similar phenomenon applies to the modern Bashkir language in which the form in -i acts as the infinitive only in the combination with such modal words as -must, -should, possible, -perhaps, possible, can, -possible, etc. The infinitive form in -oo/-oov in dialect West Siberian Tatars has the following phonetic variants: -ou, -iu, -eu, -u. A further feature of this dialect attracts our attention. Thus, in the dia lect of West-Siberian Tatars the investigated infinitive form combines with the affix . Consider examples: (dialect) -(modern Tatar language) -We need to cheat, (dialect) -(modern Tatar language) -We should pursue, etc. It should be noted that the affix in scientific works on the dialect of West Siberian Tatars taking place at the end of words with the infinitive form ending in -ou, -iu, -eu, -u is not covered exhaustively.
In our opinion, the affix is not an affix, and a reduced form of the word , which lost its initial consonant by joining to the infinitive form in -ou, -iu, -eu, -u. In the Eastern dialect of the Bashkir language the infinitive form in -ou, -iu, -eu, -u one of the most common forms. This form is mostly transmits the target value, combines with modal words -need, -must and takes the affixes of dative-instrumental case.
Let us consider, for clarity, a few examples: , -We need to return Samjhand, let him tell it; -He went to chat, etc. (Maksyutova, 1976). In the Nogai language like some of the Turkic languages, the infinitive forms are named as the action nouns. The form ending in -oov has both nominative and verbal properties. Note that the nominative feature is mainly dominated in this form. Form in -oov, takes numerative, possessive and case affixes: -flight, -to the flight, your flight, etc.
The infinitive in -oov, losing the verbal properties, moved into the category of nouns: -election, study, etc.
Note that these forms in the Nogai language combined with affix -shi, form the derivative nouns -student, -writer, etc. A similar phenomenon applies to Uzbek, Kyrgyz and other languages. The negative aspect of infinitives ending in -oov/v is formed, like verbs in Nogai and other Turkic languages, through the negative affix -ma/-me: -not to go anywhere, etc. The infinitive forms in -oo, -ioo, -yoo in Karachay-Balkar language are of interest of us. So, in Karachay-Balkar language the concept of "action nouns" is distinguished from concepts of "infinitives" and "participles". If "action nouns" and "infinitives" in some Turkic languages were synonymous terms of the same verb form, then in Karachay-Balkar language the "action nouns" are considered as a separate verbal form.
In this regard, I.Kh. Urusbiyev's statement is illustrative: "The action nouns in Karachay-Balkar language are clearly delineated, on the one hand, from participles, on the other hand -from the infinitive as its content, and its morphological structure. For example, «scrip-ture», and not "to write" (Urusbiyev, 1963). The form ending in -oo, -ioo, -yu in Karachay-Balkar language is not related to infinitive forms and does not express action, and is only its name. Most of the action nouns, formed through these affixes, having lost the main verb properties, moved into the category of nouns: -sunflower, -backup, -shooting, -filling, etc.
In the modern Tatar language, like Karachay-Balkar language, the action nouns in the system of infinitive forms stand apart. However, the action nouns ending in -i in the Tatar language, in contrast to the forms in -i in Karachay-Balkar language do not completely lost its verbal properties.

Consider the examples:
-, -One group of people, waving his arms, insisted to force them to fight, the other on how not to do it (Modern Tatar literary language. Lexicology, phonetics, morphology, 1969). Some words formed by the affix -i are fully moved into the category of the nouns: -question, -paint, -study, etc.
It is also noteworthy to mention that there are a number of adjectives in the modern Tatar language, that are homonymous with the form -i: -hot work, -excited, -the girl, under the age of majority, --to reach, etc. The infinitive form ending in -oo is also observed in the dialects of the Tatar language. So, in Mishar dialect of Tatar language this form is mainly combined with the words and . Here is an example: -we usually don't ask that way, etc. (Makhmutova, 1978).

Conclusion 2.
Though infinitive forms in modern Turkic languages studied in detail, but there are prob-lems that require new approaches. Notably, the problem of comparative functional-semantic ana-lysis of the infinitive forms of in the Turkic languages and their dialects has not investigated. In this regard, a comparative study of infinitive forms in the Turkic languages gives the opportunity to discover their similar and distinctive features.
The infinitive ending in -oov in the Turkic languages has different phonetic variants and morphological features. Thus, unlike the Uzbek language, Kyrgyz language this form has a phonetic variant -oo//-o/-io/-yu /-ou /-iu/-u/-oov. The infinitive ending in -oo, -ioo, -yu in Karachay-Balkar language is not related to infinitive forms and do not express actions. Most of the action nouns, formed by means of this affix, having lost the main verbal features, moved into the category of nouns.
In the Eastern dialect of the Bashkir language the infinitive form in -ou, -iu is one of the most common forms. This form is mostly transmits the target value, combines with modal words need, and takes the affixes of dative-instrumental case.
The infinitive form ending in -ioo, -oo in the Karakalpak language takes numerative, possessive, case affixes. Note that taking the possessive affixes, this form is mostly used with a modal forms , , -need, as well as with such postpositions as , , -about, for.