Structural and semantical features of the complex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions

Ðàçìåùåíî íà http://www.allbest.ru/

Structural and semantical features of the complex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions

Jafarova Sabina Abulfat gizi

Ganja State University

The purpose ofthe article is to study the subordinate complex sentence structures ofthe Azerbaijani language in a more comprehensive way - both in terms of structure and meaning, to reveal the role of components in communication process from the structural-semantic point of view.

Methodology and methods used. In the article, the formation of of the complex sentences formed with the subordinating conditional conjunctionsis carried out on the basis of the descriptive method. Simultaneous review of the subordinate complex sentence system of the Azerbaijani language is carried out; the comparative-historical method is also used. The methodological bases of the research are the methods, principles, techniques and scientific-theoretical provisions applied in order to study, understand and change the facts and events.

The main scientific innovation. In Azerbaijani linguistics different types of complex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions are listed and given in examples so far. There is a serious need to study the rich semantic-structural features of thecomplex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions.

The results of the study. Despite the fact that many monographs, textbooks and teaching aids have been written on complex sentences, and Ph.D. and doctoral dissertations have been defended, there are still issues to be investigated in this area. There is an opinion in the scientific literature: “For many years the complex sentences have been investigatedfrom a grammatical-functional point of view. Quite often their content has either been ignored or the functional basis has been identified”. However, disregarding the structural and semantic aspects of this language unit and their interrelationship does not lead to accurate results. This is the source of some controversies over relevant constructions in our linguistics nowadays”.

Key words: connection rules of components, subordinating conjunctions “-sa, -sa”, Adverbial clause of Condition, morphological features of conditionals.

Äæàôàðîâà Ñàá³íà Àáóëüôàò êèçè. ÑÒÐÓÊÒÓÐÍÎ-ÑÅÌÀÍÒÈ×Ͳ ÎÑÎÁËÈÂÎÑÒ² ÑÊËÀÄÍÈÕ ÐÅ×ÅÍÜ, ÑÔÎÐÌÎÂÀÍÈÕ ²Ç ϲÄÐßÄÍÈÌÈ ÏÎIJ¯

Ìåòîþ ñòàòò³ º êîìïëåêñíå âèâ÷åííÿ ñòðóêòóð ï³äëåãëèõ ñêëàäíèõ ðå÷åíü àçåðáàéäæàíñüêî¿ ìîâè ÿê çà ñòðóêòóðîþ, òàê ³ çà çíà÷åííÿì, âèÿâëåííÿ ðîë³ êîìïîíåíò³â ó êîìóí³êàòèâíîìó ïðîöåñ³ ç³ ñòðóêòóðíî-ñåìàíòè÷íîãî ïîãëÿäó.

Âèêîðèñòîâóâàíà ìåòîäîëîã³ÿ ³ ìåòîäè. Ó ñòàòò³ íà îñíîâ³ îïèñîâîãî ìåòîäó ðîçãëÿäàâñÿ îñâ³òó ñêëàäíèõ ðå÷åíü, óòâîðåíèõ ûç ï³äðÿäíèìè óìîâíèìè ñïîëó÷íèêàìè. Îäíî÷àñíî ðîçãëÿäàëîñÿ îãëÿä ñèñòåìè ï³äëåãëèõ ñêëàäíèõ ðå÷åíü àçåðáàéäæàíñüêî¿ ìîâè, äå áóâ âèêîðèñòàíèé ïîð³âíÿëüíî- ³ñòîðè÷íèé ìåòîä. Ìåòîäîëîã³÷íîþ îñíîâîþ äîñë³äæåííÿ º ìåòîäè, ïðèíöèïè, ñïîñîáè ³ íàóêîâî- òåîðåòè÷í³ ïîëîæåííÿ, ùî çàñòîñîâóþòüñÿ äëÿ âèâ÷åííÿ, ðîçóì³ííÿ ³ çì³íè ôàêò³â ³ ïîä³é.

Îñíîâíå íàóêîâå íîâîââåäåííÿ. Âïåðøå â àçåðáàéäæàíñüê³é ë³íãâ³ñòèö³ ïåðåðàõîâàí³ ³ íàâåäåí³ â ïðèêëàäàõ ð³çí³ òèïè ñêëàäíèõ ðå÷åíü, óòâîðåíèõ ³ç ï³äðÿäíèìè ñïîëó÷íèêàìè. Çàçíà÷àºòüñÿ, ùî º ñåðéîçíà ïîòðåáà ó âèâ÷åíí³ áàãàòñòâà ñåìàíòèêî-ñòðóêòóðíèõ îñîáëèâîñòåé ñêëàäíèõ ðå÷åíü, óòâîðåíèõ çà äîïîìîãîþ ï³äðÿäíèõ ñïîëó÷íèê³â.

Ðåçóëüòàòè äîñë³äæåííÿ. Íåçâàæàþ÷è íà òå, ùî ïðî ñêëàäí³ ðå÷åííÿ íàïèñàíî áåçë³÷ ìîíîãðàô³é, ï³äðó÷íèê³â òà íàâ÷àëüíèõ ïîñ³áíèê³â, çàõèùåí³ êàíäèäàòñüê³ òà äîêòîðñüê³ äèñåðòàö³¿, º ùå ïèòàííÿ, ÿê³ íàëåæèòü âèâ÷èòè â ö³é ãàëóç³. Ó íàóêîâ³é ë³òåðàòóð³ º òàêà äóìêà: «Ïðîòÿãîì áàãàòüîõ ðîê³â ñêëàäí³ ðå÷åííÿ äîñë³äæóâàëèñÿ ç ãðàìàòèêî-ôóíêö³îíàëüíî¿ ïîçèö³¿. Äîñèòü ÷àñòî ¿õ çì³ñò àáî ³ãíîðóâàâñÿ, àáî âèçíà÷àâñÿ ÿê ôóíêö³îíàëüíà îñíîâà». Îäíàê ³ãíîðóâàííÿ ñòðóêòóðíèõ ³ ñåìàíòè÷íèõ àñïåêò³â ö³º¿ ìîâíî¿ îäèíèö³ ³ ¿õ âçàºìîçâ'ÿçêó íå ïðèâîäèòü äî áàæàíèõ ðåçóëüòàò³â. ² öå âèñòóïຠäæåðåëîì ðîçá³æíîñòåé ³ç ïðèâîäó â³äïîâ³äíèõ êîíñòðóêö³é ó ñó÷àñí³é ë³íãâ³ñòèö³». subordinate conjunction adverb morphological

Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: ïðàâèëà ç'ºäíàííÿ êîìïîíåíò³â, ï³äðÿäí³ ñïîëó÷íèêè «-sa, -ss», ïðèñë³âíèê óìîâè, ìîðôîëîã³÷í³ îñîáëèâîñò³ óìîâíèõ âèðàç³â.

Problem formulation and search for solutions

Subordinating conjunctions “-sa, -so”, the main feature of the Adverbial clauses of Condition, have a long historical path. Their preform “-sar, -ser” were used in ancient Turkic written monuments. Talking about the usage of particles “-sa, -so” as suffixes in complex sentences, turkologists often use the expression “conditional suffix” or conditional period”. Speaking about the role of particles within complex sentences, Prof. A. Z. Abdullayev writes: “In ancient Turkish written monuments, the conditional suffixes “-sar, -ser” were used and as a result of historical development they have changed into “-sa, -so” [1, p. 118]. As we have noted, this is due to the reduction of the sound “r”, which is a widespread process in the Azerbaijani language. in this issue there are quite different approaches. For example, N.Z. Hajiyeva made observations on ancient Turkish written monuments and found that “-sar, -ser” and “-sa, -so” were used in parallel on the monuments. She underlines that in this case, “-sa, -so” signify modality, but “-sar, -ser” act as predicate suffixes [2, p. 131].

Examining a number of linguists' researches in recent years, it can be concluded that there are still topics to be explored regarding the complex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions.

The suffix “-sa, -so”, which is widely used in a number of types of subordinate sentences (condition, time, concession, conjunction, etc.), mainly express modality. However, N. Z. Hajiyeva thinks that, the usage of the suffixes “-sar, -ser” in the early days is a very interesting event in the historical development of thesubordinating conjunctions, and their use as predicate in complex sentences.Nowadays,in predicate category most verbs have the consonant “r” at the end just like the suffixes“-sar, -ser”sometime had the similar consonant distinguishing them from “-sa, -sa”. eg: -ir, -ir, -ur, -ur; -ar, -or; -dir, -dir, -dur, -dur and so on. The consonant “r” in the end tends to be reduced in pronunciation. For example: golmi§di (r), olmu§du (r), votondi (r), and etc.

Let's look at the other side of the issue. The complex sentences connected with the suffixes “-sar, -ser”, “-sa, -so” have historically had an independent predicate. All of the complex sentences having the suffixes “-sa, -so” are two-component sentences. The use of “-sa, -so”, the initial version of “-sar, -ser”, as a verb ending leads to this conclusion.The fact that, on the monuments the suffixes “-sar, -ser” were used together with the present time endings (ersar, erser) confirms the above-mentioned idea. The study of language materials shows that in complex sentences connected with the suffix “-sa, -so” both the suffixes o“-sar, -ser” and the verb's conditional ending are omitted. In this case, it does not matter whether the predicate is a verb or a predicative. Simply, it should be based on the criterion that if “-sa, -so” are added to the lexical units, they denote the conditional form of the verb, but if they are added to the grammatical unitsthey can be omitted. Let's look at a few examples:

- Gorsalar yanir insan - If they saw a burning man

- Yanana od verdilar - They would give him flames (Ý. Karim - A. Karim);

- Butun alam qosuncaksa, alinmazdir sozun yurdu (S.Vurgun) - If the whole world draws troops, the land of the word is invincible (S.Vurgun);

- Hunarin varsa, get atanla haqq-hesab qak (². $ixli) - If you have the courage, go and settle accounts with your father (I. Shikhli);

- Muallim ona bir sual verarsa, qipqirmizi olardi (M. ibrahimov) - If the teacher asked him a question, he would go red (M. Ibrahimov).

In the first and second examples, the suffixes of the conditional form of the verbs are omitted, while in the third and fourth examples the particles are reduced. In the third example, the predicate is preceded by the predicative suffix (“Hunorin var (dir) sa ... - “If you have the courage ...”). All of the conjunctions in the examples create conditional content between the components, so those sentences are compound sentences with a conditional clause.

All of the conjunctions in the examples create conditional content between the components, so those sentences are complex sentences with conditional clauses. In the last two examples, suffixes “-sa, -so” can be easily reduced, because in these sentences the conditional content seems to go into the background, and “-sa, -so” lose their semantics in the sentence as it moves away from the lexical unit:

- If you have the courage, go and settle accounts with your father (I. Shikhli);

In fact, in this example “-sa, -so” don't create conditional content in the same way as “iso”. In our opinion, the same situation occurs when other conjunctions are added to the suffix “-sa, -so”; Different shades of meaning are added to the sentences as the “-sa, -so” suffix components leave the conjunctive functions to other conjunctive means. That is why the connection between the components in the analytical-syndetic type of sentences is out of the control of “-sa, -so”. This process occurs mainly in complex sentences, the components of which are connected by “-sa, -so”, but not in the adverbial clauses of condition.

Prof. G. Sh. Kazimov, speaking about conjunctive components in complex sentences with conditionals, emphasizes the role of intonation as a means of connection and defines four types of subordinate clauses: asyndetic, syndetic, analytical and analytical- syndetic [3, p. 308]. In the scientific literature, this division belongs to M. Shiraliyev. In these examples, the linguist emphasizes that in asyndetic sentences the principal clauses are joined to subordinate clauses only by intonation, and the possibility of adding the suffix “-sa, -so” to the boundary of the components at any time. He classifies sentences with the suffixes “-sa, -so”, the auxiliary word “iso”, and its reduction (-sa, -so) as a syndetic type, whilethe subordinate clauses with “if”, “horgah” and the suffixes “-sa, -so” are the analytic-syndetic type of subordinate clauses.

Syndetic type of subordinate clauses are formed by so called “-sa, -so” or its “-sa da, -so do” variants, as well as “-mi, -mi, -mu, -mu”. In morphology, “-sa, -so” is taught as a sign of a conditional form, and “iso” is taught as a conjunction or particle that forms a condition of verb forms. Particles are the most used auxiliary parts of speech in our language. His role in speech is remarkable for its breadth and versatility. The term “odat” (a particle) used in modern grammar books is very different from previous periods. In the past, the word “odat” and “odavat” included all auxiliary parts of speech (conjunctions, conjunctions, exclamations, adats, and all suffixes). But the interesting fact is that “odat” (particles) given in modern grammars are words and morphemes that are different from auxiliary parts of speech, which either disappeared in them at the time, or were not taken into account at all” [4, p. 102].

Thus, it is not accidental that the reduced form of the particles “-sa, -so” and “iso” are called “odat” (particles). In fact, the situation is completely different. The role of the particles “-sa, -so” or “iso” don't correspond to the function of “odat” as a part of speech. “Odat” (particles) are presented as auxiliary means of strengthening, clarifying, questioning, limiting, commanding, affirming and denying, expressing desires and reservations. As can be seen from the division, there is no special group that states a condition; “ka§”, “ka§ ki”, “toki”, “bari”, “bari”, “bir”, “birco”, “no ola”, “nola”are included. From what has been said, it follows that what is called “odat” (particles) as a means of connection are in fact suffixes. In the scientific literature on complex sentences, these are called “odat” (particles). It is noted that not only conditionals, but also other types of subordinate sentences are connected by these means. When we look at the examples, we see that these suffixes, which are called “odat” (particles), are nothing more than morphological means that form the conditionals of the verb or the verb forms.

For example,

Azadliq ugrunda candan da keqsan, - If you die for freedom,

Yanginlar iqinda alov da iqsan, - If you drink fire,

Bu qanli, qirginli doyu$larda san, - In these bloody, battles,

Ancaq zancirini itiracaksan (S. Vurgun) - You will lose the chain (S. Vurgun);

Bu saat onun saqini bilayina dolayib surumasan, ki$i deyilsan; Qayiqdakilar na qadar calissalar da, istiqamati duz gotura bilmir, su qayigi ayirdi; O galmasa idi, bizim evda bu dava-dalas da olmazdi; Anasi ila goz ya$i axidan Salatin na qadar yalvardisa da, arvad inadindan donmadi (². $ixli). - You are not a man if you do not drag her by her hair right now; no matter how hard didthe people on the boat try, they couldn't get in the right direction, the boat was bending; If he hadn't come, there would have been no quarrel in our house; Salatin shed tears and begged, but the woman did not change her mind (I. Shikhli).

As can be seen from the examples, whether “-sa, -so”, or “-sa da, -so do” create conditional content in all sentences, connect any action with general conditional semantics, “odat” (the particle) does not play a key role (strengthening speech). It means that the naming of these connective particles as “odat” (particles) is only conditional-stylistic and is connected with a certain tradition. The first and second complex sentences have conditional and comparative clauses, while the third one contains the adverbial clause of time. Preliminary observations on literary and artistic language, as well as colloquial language shows that the structural-semantic relations created in complex sentences are in the forefront. The characteristic feature of these particles is that the “-sa, -so” is a condition, and the “-sa da, -so do” particles are the main connecting means between the components of the complex sentences [5, p. 21].

When we look at the components of the complex sentence in which these “odat” (particles) are used, it is clear that both “-sa da, -so do”, the suffixes forming the conditional form of the verbs, and“-sa, -so”, which are reduces forms of the particle “iso”, are parallel grammatical means. For example:

Bir az san talassan, - if You had hurried a little bit, Man geciksaydim, - If I had been late,

Balka ayirmazdi sahillar bizi (N. Xazri); - the shores might not have separated us (N. Khazri);

Vallah, od daryasini yar, kec, desalar kecaram (M. ibrahimov) - Swear God, if I am said to cross the open sea of flames, I will cross (M. Ibrahimov);

Gulasarinalaci olsa, onu heq yana buraxmazdi (². $ixli) - If Gulesar had a cure, he would not let her go anywhere (I. Shikhli);

Vadam tamamdisa, gal al canimi (A. Glasgar) - If my lifeends and come and take my life (A. Alasgar);

Dunyada dusdunsa min darda, qama - Qaranliq cakmadi gozuna parda (S. Vurgun).

Even if you had fallen into the world's sorrows, grief - You hadn't have drawn the veil of darkness over your eyes (S. Vurgun)

In the first three examples, the components are connected by the suffixes of the conditional forms of the verbs, but in the fourth and fifth examples, they are connected by the reduced forms of the particle “iso”. As we see in first two examples “-sa, -so” were added to the lexical unit, while in the latter examples the particles were used before the predicative endings [6, p. 403].

The semantic features created by “-sa, -so” in the sentences are also related to their position of adding to the verb roots. In this point, they differ from the reduced forms of the particle “iso” significantly. As a rule, the suffixes of the conditional form “-sa, -so”are either added directly to the root of the verbs, or to the initial forms, or after the negation suffixes. On the other hand, like other endings, the verb with the suffix “-sa, -so” cannot accept any time suffixes. The “isa” element, on the other hand, cannot be attached directly to the root of the verb, but is used only after the tense suffixes, in the imperative sentences, and even after the personal suffixes. “isa” is used not only with verbs but also with nouns [7, p. 78].

For example:

I. iqari getsam, danigmaga soz da tapmaram; Balks da o qabagima keqmasa,

gedib bir xata qixardacaqdim (². $ixli); - If I go in, I can't find a word to say; Maybe if he hadn't passed me, I would have gone and made a mistake (I. Shikhli);

Faxraddin bay ortaliqdan goturulsa, balka, ig rast yoluna duga (N. Vazirov);

- If Fakhraddin Bey were taken out, the problem would be solved (N. Vazirov);

Bagini qirxdirib on beg sutka yatirtmasalar sani, manheq na bilmiram (M. Suleymanli);

I bet tthey will shave your head and put into prison for fifteen days (M. Suleymanli);

II. Onda taqsir yoxdur, oldurursansa, mani oldur (². $ixli) - He is not guilty. If you want to kill somebody, please kill me.

insan bag ayirsa, - If a person bows,

Qanun da sukut etmali! (B. Vahabzada) - The law must be silent! (B. Vahabzade);

Sozun keqmazsa bir yerda - If your words are not heard somewhere

Boyukluk sada susmaqdir (S. Vurgun) - Simple silence is your greatness (S. Vurgun);

Arzuyla ucalanbir xayalamsa,Omrum, hayatimdir geirimla sevgim (N. Xazri) - If I am a dream rising with imagination, my lov, my poemsare my life, (N. Khazri);

Dirisansa, bir diriliyini bildir, ay rahmatlik oglu! (M. ibrahimov) - If you are alive, give a sign! (M. Ibrahimov);

Dardin ela busa, lap arxayin gaz (S. Vurgun) - If your only problem is this, then you may relax.

The suffixes of the conditional forms of the verbs “-sa, -sa” in group I sentences create the conditional content. In the first sentence they are added to the root of the verb, in the second sentence after the negative suffix, and in the third and fourth sentences after the suffix of type. If to have a closer look, we can see that the last sentences clearly shows the object's interference in the fulfillment of the condition, i.e. the fulfillment of the condition is carried out by the object, not the subject.

In-group II sentences, the element “-sa, -sa” can be explained by their grammatical positions; in the first sentence, the meaning of the condition occurs after the predicative and the personal endings, and in the second sentence “-sa” used after the predicative ending denotes judgment; the second component is imperative, which in itself expresses the semantics of direct command. In other sentences included in the group, the words denoting the noun allow for both informative and conditional content.

One of the interesting features of the conditional suffix, as well as the conditional form of the verb, is that it does not have the interrogative content. “Because the interrogative forms contradict the semantics of the conditionals. Even if the second sentence after the conditional verb is pronounced with the question intonation, the question does not belong to the conditional form, but determines the effect of the conditionally connected action on the next action” [8, p. 21]. This is quite true in this case. Question intonation usually occurs at the end of a sentence, and conditional suffixes are usually the first components. It is true that in poetry there is a case when the conditional sentence takes the second position during inversion, but this is a violation of the grammatical norm, not the dimension of literary language.

M. Rahimov writes: “... the expression of the meaning of “-sa, -sa” was a partial phenomenon for some Turkic languages and should be considered relatively ancient because it is common feature. So, in written monuments of the Azerbaijani language before the XVIII century the usage of “-sa, -sa” as subjunctive mood is a historically legitimate linguistic phenomenon. Due to the nature of the development of “-sa ... -sa” as subjunctive mood, the Azerbaijani language differs significantly from other Turkic languages: in contrast to the Turkish, Turkmen, Uzbek languages, in the modern Azerbaijani language-whetherliterary,colloquialordialectlanguages, “-sa ...-sa” forms can neither be used as predicate in the sentences and nor be used as subjunctive mood” [9, p. 176].

In different dissertations on complex sentences formed with the subordinating conjunctions there is a lot of information about the preforms and derivatives of these suffixes, as well as the morphological and stylistic features of the suffix “-sa, -sa” and compared materials of the Azerbaijani language with examples from other Turkic languages. In general, the research is not aimed at researching specific language material, but simply listing it. Rather than the role of “-sa, -sa” in the sentences, the presentation of types of sentence of complex sentences in Turkic languages are drawn to the fore with the schemesand in comparison. In our opinion, the role of this suffixes “-sa, -sa” in compound sentences should be paid more attention, and their effect in the context of the general sentence should be studied on the basis of separate examples. Particularly, this issue is not only met in subject, object, and predicative clauses, based on the correlative principles, but also in adverbial clauses of condition and comparison.

On the other hand, prof. M. Musayev thinks that, the adverbial clauses of concession connected by analytical-syndetic method, is more widespread in the Oghuz group languages. Here, he writes: “Here, as an initial sign of syndetic, the suffix “-sa, -so” are added to the predicate of the subordinate clauses, and the use of the particles “-da, -do” is a characteristic of each of the languages studied. In the Turkic languages, the particles “-da, -do” can be used both before and after the predicative of the sentence [10, p. 172].

Summarizing the facts above, it can be concluded that the particles “-da, -do” used after the suffix “-sa, -so” acts not only as a formal sign in the connection of the components within complex sentences, but also creates a rich semantic-content.

The results of the study

Despite the fact that many monographs, textbooks and teaching aids have been written on complex sentences, doctoral dissertations have been defended, there are still issues to be investigated in this area. There is an opinion in the scientific literature: “For many years the complex sentences have been investigated from a grammatical-functional point of view. Quite often their content has either been ignored or the functional basis has been identified.” However, disregarding the structural and semantic aspects of this language unit and their interrelationship does not lead to accurate results. This is the source of some controversies over relevant constructions in our linguistics nowadays”.

References:

1. Haciyeva N. Z., Screbrennikov B. A. (2002) [Comparative Historical Grammar of Turkish Languages. Baku: Sade], Turk dillorinin muqayisoli tarixi qrammatikasi. Baki : Soda, 381 s.

2. Abdullayev A. Z. (1974) [Subordinate Compound Sentences in Modern Azerbaijani Language. Baku: Maarif], Muasir Azorbaycan dilindo tabeli murokkob cumlolor. Baku: Maarif, 418 s.

3. Kazimov Q. §. (2009a) [Selected Works (Vol. VII). Baku : Nurlan], Seqilmi§ osorlori (VII cild), Baki: Nurlan, 576 s.

4. Rustomov R. (2009) [Syntax of the Turkish Language (Textbook). Baku : Nurlan], Turk dilinin sintaksisi (dorslik). Baki: Nurlan, 202 s.

5. Yunusov A. R. (2017) [The Problem of Complex Sentences in Modern Turkish Linguistics. Baku: Science and Education], Muasir turk dilqiliyindo murokkob cumlo problemi. Baki : Elm vo tohsil, 120 s.

6. Kazimov Q. §. (2009b) [Selected Works (vol. VIII). Baku : Nurlan], Seqilmi§ osorlori (VIII cild), Baki: Nurlan, 544 s.

7. Seyidov Y. M., Mordanova S. M. (2008) [Grammar Problems in Azerbaijani Linguistics (Textbook). Baku: Baku University Publishing House], Azorbaycan dilqiliyindo qrammatika problemlori (dorslik). Baki : Baki Universiteti, 312 s.

8. Yusibova G. (2006) [On the Means of Connecting the Components of Subordinate Compound Sentences in the Language of Nasimi - Research of the Institute of Linguistics Named After Nasimi. Part I, Baku], Nosiminin dilindo tabeli murokkob cumlolorin torkib hissolorini olaqolondiron vasitolor haqqinda. AMEA-nin Nosimi adina Dilqilik institutunun todqiqlori, I hisso, Baki, s. 17-21.

9. Rohimov M. (2014) [History of the Formation of Verb Forms in the Azerbaijani Language. Baku : AMEA Publication], Azorbaycan dilindo feil §okillorinin formala§masi tarixi. Baki: AMEA, 318 s.

10. Musayev M. M. (2011) [Syntax of Complex Sentences in Turkic Literary Languages. Baku : BSU Publication], Turk odobi dillorindo murokkob cumlo sintaksisi. Baki : BSU, 404 s.

Ðàçìåùåíî íà Allbest.ru