Vocative Words And Mehmet Akif Ersoy's Creativity
Keywords:
poetic language, style, vocative, literary artistryAbstract
This article examines the stylistic features of vocatives in the poetry of Mehmet Akif Ersoy, a prominent representative of 20th-century Turkish literature. The study aims to identify the functions of vocatives in the poet’s language and to analyze their role in speech acts, emotional expressions, and the conveyance of ideological messages. The research employs a comparative analysis based on both classical vocative theory and international studies on vocatives. The findings reveal that Ersoy’s vocatives are not merely tools of address; they also function as strategic stylistic devices that enhance the emotional resonance of the text and reinforce ideological, religious, and national messages. Vocatives serve to direct the reader’s attention, shape the structure and rhythm of the text, and facilitate interaction between the poet and the audience. The study further investigates the contexts of vocative usage, recurrent forms, and their calling and addressing functions. Compared with international approaches, it is evident that in Ersoy’s poetry, vocatives are employed not only for stylistic purposes but also to communicate social and religious values and to convey instructive and moral messages that resonate within society. These results highlight the strategic and functional aspects of Ersoy’s stylistic approach in both the context of Turkish vocative literature and global vocative studies. By presenting a comparative perspective between Ersoy’s vocatives and international vocative research, the article contributes to a deeper understanding of the functional and emotional dimensions of vocatives in poetic discourse.
References
1. Baran, E., & Gürsoy, E. (2022). Address terms and social distance in Turkish. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 26(2), 200–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12504
2. Bousquette, P. (2019). Pragmatic functions of vocatives in native and non native English. Journal of Pragmatics, 151, 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.07.012
3. Ersoy, M. A. (2021). Safahat (Şiir külliyatı). Ankara, Türkiye: TBMM Yayınları. (The New York Public Library), 1017 s.
4. Felix, S. (2018). The role of vocatives in spoken interaction. Studies in Language, 42(2), 325–347. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.00012.fel
5. Himmelmann, N. P., & Schladt, M. (2019). Vocatives in cross linguistic perspective. Language, 95(4), 857–893. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2019.0056
6. Jeong, M., & Kim, H. (2021). Social meaning of vocatives in Korean conversation. Discourse Processes, 58(7), 531–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2020.1820912
7. Kövecses, Z. (2021). Emotive vocatives in figurative language. Metaphor and Symbol, 36(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926488.2021.1874265
8. Öztürk, B., & Aydın, O. (2019). The vocative case in Turkish: A discourse semantic study. Linguistics and Philosophy, 42(3), 325–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-019-09445-2
9. Papahristodoulou, E. (2018). Vocatives, prosody, and interpersonal stance. Journal of Linguistic Inquiry, 49(2), 263–290. https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00266
10. Risebrough, R. W. (2020). Vocatives in the speech act framework. Journal of Pragmatics, 24(6), 785–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2020.06.001
11. van de Velde, F., & Grote, R. (2017). Address terms and vocatives in European languages. Linguistic Typology, 21(1), 147–191. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2017-0004