@inproceedings{mus-etal-2026-negation,
title = "Negation of {T}urkic non-verbal clauses: Analysis and {U}niversal {D}ependencies Implementation",
author = {Mus, Nikolett and
Akkurt, Furkan and
Chontaeva, Bermet and
Eslami, Soudabeh and
Ivanova, Sardana and
{\c{C}}{\"o}ltekin, {\c{C}}a{\u{g}}r{\i} and
Washington, Jonathan N. and
Dzhumalieva, Gulnura and
Kasieva, Aida},
editor = {{\c{C}}{\"o}ltekin, {\c{C}}a{\u{g}}r{\i} and
Dobrovoljc, Kaja},
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on {U}niversal {D}ependencies ({UDW} 2026)",
month = may,
year = "2026",
address = "Palma de Mallorca, Spain",
publisher = "ELRA Language Resources Association (ELRA)",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.udw-1.7/",
doi = "10.63317/3tfwkpfmuxdq",
pages = "97--102",
abstract = "The paper examines the grammatical behavior of the negative element used to negate predicates in non-verbal clauses in three Turkic languages: Azerbaijani, Kyrgyz, and Turkish. We focus on its interaction with verbal copulas, subject agreement, and the distribution of agreement suffixes, as well as its position within the predicate phrase. The study draws on both previously described corpus data and newly collected examples. Across all three languages, agreement features are realised on the negative element only in the absence of an overt copula. The agreement morphology involved is identical to that found with nominal, adjectival, and adverbial predicates. In all the languages examined, the negative element remains within the predicate phrase; thus, its position is syntactically constrained. At the same time, we observe differences among the languages in the degree to which the position of the negator is fixed within the predicate. In Turkish and Azerbaijani, regardless of which element of the nominal predicate it negates, the negator invariably follows the predicate. In Kyrgyz, by contrast, it consistently appears immediately after the element it negates within the predicate. These patterns suggest that the negative element behaves syntactically as a phrasal operator associated with non-verbal predicates. For annotation purposes, we therefore propose analysing the negative element as a negation modifier, assigning it the POS tag ADV and the dependency relation advmod:neg."
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="mus-etal-2026-negation">
<titleInfo>
<title>Negation of Turkic non-verbal clauses: Analysis and Universal Dependencies Implementation</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Nikolett</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mus</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Furkan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Akkurt</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Bermet</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Chontaeva</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Soudabeh</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Eslami</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sardana</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Ivanova</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Çağrı</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Çöltekin</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jonathan</namePart>
<namePart type="given">N</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Washington</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Gulnura</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dzhumalieva</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Aida</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Kasieva</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-05</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2026)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Çağrı</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Çöltekin</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Kaja</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Dobrovoljc</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>ELRA Language Resources Association (ELRA)</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Palma de Mallorca, Spain</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>The paper examines the grammatical behavior of the negative element used to negate predicates in non-verbal clauses in three Turkic languages: Azerbaijani, Kyrgyz, and Turkish. We focus on its interaction with verbal copulas, subject agreement, and the distribution of agreement suffixes, as well as its position within the predicate phrase. The study draws on both previously described corpus data and newly collected examples. Across all three languages, agreement features are realised on the negative element only in the absence of an overt copula. The agreement morphology involved is identical to that found with nominal, adjectival, and adverbial predicates. In all the languages examined, the negative element remains within the predicate phrase; thus, its position is syntactically constrained. At the same time, we observe differences among the languages in the degree to which the position of the negator is fixed within the predicate. In Turkish and Azerbaijani, regardless of which element of the nominal predicate it negates, the negator invariably follows the predicate. In Kyrgyz, by contrast, it consistently appears immediately after the element it negates within the predicate. These patterns suggest that the negative element behaves syntactically as a phrasal operator associated with non-verbal predicates. For annotation purposes, we therefore propose analysing the negative element as a negation modifier, assigning it the POS tag ADV and the dependency relation advmod:neg.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">mus-etal-2026-negation</identifier>
<identifier type="doi">10.63317/3tfwkpfmuxdq</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.udw-1.7/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-05</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>97</start>
<end>102</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Negation of Turkic non-verbal clauses: Analysis and Universal Dependencies Implementation
%A Mus, Nikolett
%A Akkurt, Furkan
%A Chontaeva, Bermet
%A Eslami, Soudabeh
%A Ivanova, Sardana
%A Çöltekin, Çağrı
%A Washington, Jonathan N.
%A Dzhumalieva, Gulnura
%A Kasieva, Aida
%Y Çöltekin, Çağrı
%Y Dobrovoljc, Kaja
%S Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2026)
%D 2026
%8 May
%I ELRA Language Resources Association (ELRA)
%C Palma de Mallorca, Spain
%F mus-etal-2026-negation
%X The paper examines the grammatical behavior of the negative element used to negate predicates in non-verbal clauses in three Turkic languages: Azerbaijani, Kyrgyz, and Turkish. We focus on its interaction with verbal copulas, subject agreement, and the distribution of agreement suffixes, as well as its position within the predicate phrase. The study draws on both previously described corpus data and newly collected examples. Across all three languages, agreement features are realised on the negative element only in the absence of an overt copula. The agreement morphology involved is identical to that found with nominal, adjectival, and adverbial predicates. In all the languages examined, the negative element remains within the predicate phrase; thus, its position is syntactically constrained. At the same time, we observe differences among the languages in the degree to which the position of the negator is fixed within the predicate. In Turkish and Azerbaijani, regardless of which element of the nominal predicate it negates, the negator invariably follows the predicate. In Kyrgyz, by contrast, it consistently appears immediately after the element it negates within the predicate. These patterns suggest that the negative element behaves syntactically as a phrasal operator associated with non-verbal predicates. For annotation purposes, we therefore propose analysing the negative element as a negation modifier, assigning it the POS tag ADV and the dependency relation advmod:neg.
%R 10.63317/3tfwkpfmuxdq
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.udw-1.7/
%U https://doi.org/10.63317/3tfwkpfmuxdq
%P 97-102
Markdown (Informal)
[Negation of Turkic non-verbal clauses: Analysis and Universal Dependencies Implementation](https://aclanthology.org/2026.udw-1.7/) (Mus et al., UDW 2026)
ACL
- Nikolett Mus, Furkan Akkurt, Bermet Chontaeva, Soudabeh Eslami, Sardana Ivanova, Çağrı Çöltekin, Jonathan N. Washington, Gulnura Dzhumalieva, and Aida Kasieva. 2026. Negation of Turkic non-verbal clauses: Analysis and Universal Dependencies Implementation. In Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2026), pages 97–102, Palma de Mallorca, Spain. ELRA Language Resources Association (ELRA).