Possibility, Necessity, and Negation in Turkish, Azerbaijani, and Turkmen: A Study Based on Modality

Abstract

Epistemic modality concerns the speaker’s stance toward the truth value of a proposition, whereas deontic modality relates to permission or obligation imposed either by the speaker or by a social authority, including legal, religious, ethical, or other normative institutions. Although epistemic and deontic modality are often treated as distinct categories, many languages have modality markers that express both types of modality due to diachronic developments. Modality markers that originally expressed ability may come to express root possibility, permission, and speculative possibility, while those that expressed obligation may begin to convey deduction. This article examines the Turkish marker -(y)Abil-, the Azerbaijani -(y)A bil-, and the Turkmen -p bil-, all of which encode speculative possibility and permission, as well as the marker -mAlI, which signals deduction and obligation and is shared by all three written Turkic varieties. Despite their formal similarity, these markers display noteworthy differences, particularly in their interaction with negation. For example, the modality markers -(y)A bil- in Azerbaijani and -p bil- in Turkmen can be used with double negation, in the forms of -mAyA bilmə- and -mAn bilme-, respectively. Identifying these differences constitutes one of the main aims of the study. The article first provides an overview of epistemic and deontic modality and introduces the theoretical framework on which the study is based. It then analyses the relevant markers in Turkish, Azerbaijani, and Turkmen in terms of possibility, necessity, and negation on the basis of modal logic.

Ethical committee approval is not required for this research.

Ethics Statement
This study was prepared in accordance with the principles of research and publication ethics, and all works consulted have been cited in the reference list.

The author declares no conflicts of interest in this study.

This research received no external funding

Use of Artificial Intelligence
No artificial intelligence-based tool or application was used in the preparation of this study. The content of the study was prepared by the author in accordance with scientific research methods and the principles of academic ethics.