The coding of subjectivity in Turkish and the importance of subjectivity in teaching Turkish as a foreign language

The study's main purpose is to examine subjectivity as the field in which the individual manifests himself via language. First, subjectivity's marking mechanisms in language and its layers are theoretically defined, identified and discussed. It was determined that subjectivity exists in language in three layers. Accordingly, the relations of these layers with their domains and each other were examined. Since subjectivity is related to the superordinate attitudinal domain, and the types of modes connected to it and its markers were identified. Among these deictics, the morphemes, the most prominent markers of attitudinality were selected and examined using the metasyntheses method. Based on the approach that speakers can indicate the degree of their confidence in the certainty of the proposition and the quality of the evidence in the proposition, it is assumed that subjectivity can also be graded. In this framework, the morphemes to be closely examined were selected by the respective mark modality and subjectivity in Turkish. The domains of these morphemes were determined by discourse analysis through examples compiled from works in various types of essays, letters, and travel writings. The relations of these domains were identified to be marked by the morphemes via subjectivity. The types of modes they marked and the degree of subjectivity were determined. Subjectivity degrees are shown through schemas for each morpheme within the framework of the rating criterion developed within the scope of this study. Since the morphemes are related to the teaching of grammar in language teaching, the importance of grammar teaching in language teaching and in teaching Turkish as a foreign language were discussed. Within the framework of grammar teaching, and the contexts in which the formalities are taught, the definitions and explanations related to these morphemes in the books of teaching Turkish as a foreign language were examined critically. Suggestions were made on how and on which level the domains marked by each morpheme should be taught.