In Kazakh language, an optative mood is formed analytically, by adding the suffixes -qy (-qi, -ky, -ki) to the main, derivative and negative verb forms, paired with an auxiliary verb kel.
In school and university textbooks these affixes refer to derivative suffixes that create new personalized words by adding to the root of the verb. For example: sysprqy, burqy, shalqy, ashytky, kondyrqy, etc.
Professor А.Yskakov indicates three different peculiarities of these suffixes: “By means of these forms we can create a derivative noun from the verb, a verb from the verb (for example: zhulky, atky, syrqy, etc.), an adjective from the verb (for example: zhinaky, buralky, etc.)” [12, 154].
Professor М. Tomanov: “…the researchers of ancient written languages point to two main features of the form” (-qu):
1. Denomination of the action, process.
2. Using this form in predicative relations, inform the executor of the action of possibilities and obligations.
“We can notice that the latter feature is very conformable with “-qy keledi” in Kazakh language” – says the scientist [74, 64–65].
The scientist, having analyzed the works of Mahmud Kashgari “Diwan lughat al-Turk”, explains that the affixes “qylyk, uqly” used in it are the components, consisting of the elements “-qy-lyk, uq-ly”; he explains that the combinations used in M. Kashgari’s work mean the following: barqulyk erdi – intending to go, turqulyk erdi – intending to live in this place; the complements –qy, (or -ky) are the complements to the nouns of action. That is, М. Kashgari’s materials show the ways of forming an optative mood and also prove that this type of optative mood is formed not from the underived verb, but from the forms of action nouns [14, 106–107].
In his work, Kyrgyz scientist М. Yunusaliev proves in detail that phonetic variants of the affixes -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki occur in form of -ky, -ku, -qy, -ki, -qi and that they are used to create personal words and the category of verb [75, 133].
The affixes ky, -ki, -qy, -qi are clearly the ancient forms. These forms are traced in the language of medieval monuments in the form of –ku,-qiu,-qi,-qu [89, 228–231].
The scientist А. Ibatov found out that in the poem of the XІV century «Khosrow and Shirin» 58 words were formed by means of affixes -qu,-qiu, and was reproduced in eight different versions (-qu, -qiu, -kiu, -ky, -yk, -uq, -q, -qa) [77, 107–108].
The affixes -qu,-qiu used to form action nouns from non-derivative verbs were often used in the poem of “Khosrow and Shirin”, as well as in many mediaeval monuments, for example, in heritages like “Gulistan bit-turki”, “Mukhabbatname”, “Nakhdzh al-Faradis”. However, in historical monuments this affix was used separately, without the auxiliary verb “kel”. For example, yokalqular kamyqlary yokalqay – let what is to be lost to be lost; imdi chara tabmazman kutulqu – no means left to escape. Here, these forms are used both as a verb and an adjective.
A famous turcologist E.V. Sevortyan indicated that the suffixes -kala, -kyl, meaning repeating actions, consist of suffixes -ka, -ky, -la; N.Z. Gadzhieva and B.А. Serebrennikov refer this form to a collective sense in Turkic languages: “this affix indicates to the names of twins, for example, legs, ears. It is also peculiar to the affix -lyk, giving a collective plural meaning (in the Tatar language “kayanlyk” means “from the birch”).
The scientists write: “Based on this, we can assume that the affix q (к) primarily gives the sense of collective plurality. Further it acquired the meaning of “short”. And finally, it got the meaning of modality, an intention to perform certain actions” [79, 103; 79–4–5].
А. Ibatov in his scientific article “The traces of historical formation of the affixes -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki on the way of forming derivative verbs” discovered the patterns of affixes in forming the words, and proved that these affixes, connecting with the non-derivative verbs, form derived dead roots [77, 106–112].
Summing up the above, it is necessary to note that the linguistic materials prove that the suffixes -ky, -ki, -qy, -qi used to form optative mood are the ancient affixes that were used as qy, -ki, -qu, -gu, -qy, -qi in ancient monuments, and were used as a verb as well. Professor S. Isaev on these peculiarities of this affix said the following: “The main reason for their being a noun and a verb at the same time lies in the fact that everything depends on what parts of speech the root that is added an affix belongs to. It could be under the influence of Turkic syncretism, the time when all affixes were not fully formed, that is, those early times, when the words describing movements, actions, things and their properties were very similar to one another, and it was possible to distinguish them only by their semantic properties and intonations when spoken aloud. This phenomenon is typical of Kazakh language as well” [18, 266–267].
Modern Kazakh language has the optative mood of the verb that is formed by adding possessive forms of affixes and auxiliary verb kel to these affixes.
Despite the fact that at a time this form had been used as a verb and as a noun, at present, when it has been formed as a morphological formant of a nominal word, it can no more be used as a verb formant and is always used with an auxiliary verb kel.
An optative mood with the suffixes -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki and combined with an auxiliary verb kel is one of the commonly used derivative form. It is frequently found in literary works, spoken language, print publication, TV, radio, etc.
As this from occurs through combination of the main and auxiliary verbs, it refers to analytical forms. Affixes -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki are added to the main verbs and then the auxiliary verb kel is added. The affixes -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki completely differ from other affixes with their connection with the root. The main reason is that the affixes (-qy, -qi, -ky, -ki) are closely connected with the auxiliary verb kel. If they will be used in combination with other auxiliary verbs, they cannot convey the meaning of “a wish, desire”. For example, the combinations aitkym turady, aitkym salady, aitkym shygady don’t convey any meaning. This form cannot be combined with any other auxiliary verb. In order to convey the meaning of a wish, desire, intention it should always be combined with the auxiliary verb kel. Without this verb there will be no sense. That’s why we can say that the affixes (-qy, -qi, -ky, -ki) and the auxiliary verb kel are a complete unit.
The formants (-ky, -ki, -qy, -qi) kel are added together to the semantic verb. Along with that, a combination of an auxiliary verb kel without the affixes (-qy, -qi, -ky, -ki) added to the semantic verb would not bear a sense. For example, if we deprive the phrase soileqim keledi of the affix -qi, we will have soile keledi, which is of no meaning. In this combination the verb soile takes the formant kel not as an individual lexical and grammatical form, but as a morpheme. The auxiliary verb kel, deprived of its lexical meaning, is used as a semantic and grammatical supplement to the main verb. For example, 1. Al, keibireuler ogan otkenning zhaman adetin koskysy keledi. Bakastykty, baktalastykty kozdyrgysy keledi (And someone wants to carry over bad habits. They want to stir up the rivalry).
These sentences show the intentions, desires and aims of certain subjects in the third person through such phrases as “koskysy keledi, kozdyrqysy keledi”. Here the word keledi is used not in the literal meaning; at first, the semantic verbs (kos, kozdyr) are added affixes -qy, -ky, then they are added a possessive form of affix (-sy), and only after that we put the word kel in the future tense to attain the meaning of an intent, aim and desire.
3. Baluan dzhigit kureskisi keldi. Onerin korsetkisi keldi. Zhuzinde zhylylyk kana bar (The wrestler wants to fight. He wants to show his dexterity. He emanates warmth).
In this sentence the wrestler’s wish was conveyed through the formant – ki kel. These sentences give us a clear understanding that the formants (-qy, -qi, -ky, -ki) kel can be used in conjunction with the action verbs associated only with the desires of an animate subject. For example, we cannot use the combinations like “kalamnyn zhazqysy keledi” (the pen wants to write) or “terezenin synqysy kelmeidi” (the window doesn’t want to break) as the subject is inanimate. That means that this formant is combined only with verbs describing an internal state of feeling of the subject. Moreover, the formant -qy (-qi, -ky, -ki) kel gives an idea of the internal feelings, desires, intentions, dreams of the subject, but has no relation to reality. For example, the sentence “onyn suda zhuzqisi keledi” (he wants to swim) shows only the intention of a subject to swim, but doesn’t show if he swam or is swimming at the moment. The subject’s dream may never come true.
The auxiliary verb kel, which conveys the meaning of a wish in this structure is always used in a third person in a singular number, and the semantic verb is added affixes -qy (-qi, -ky, -ki), and then these affixes are added a possessive form of affixes.
Due to the constant presence of a possessive affix, we can determine the subject of the sentence through the nominal word in a genitive case; if there is no such word, his person is determined through one of the possessive affixes peculiar to three persons. Some turkologists and Kazakh language specialists hold the view that some forms of the verb conjugate via possessive affixes. «The form of the optative mood is a specially conjugated form of a verb. An optative mood is connected with the main verb by adding possessive affixes to the form -qy, -qi, -ky, -ki, combined with the auxiliary verb keldi or keledi, the compound verb is conjugated using the possessive affix, the performer of the action, the person (personal pronoun) is put not into a nominative case, but a genitive» [18, 131].
And the auxiliary verb kel is always in the third person in a singular number, however, it doesn’t have the sense of a third person. This sense disappeared. Professor S. Isaev wrote the following on it: It is a predicate that ends the sentence in an orderly manner. It has a zero form in the third person with a personal affix, and it is not used in another person, as formally its grammatical subject is used as the definition in an attractive form» [18, 131].
The person of a verb here is conveyed via possessive form. This feature is connected with the fact that the action is sometimes conveyed as a verb and sometimes as a noun.
All the works on the features of impersonal sentences in the Kazakh language mention one feature – the predicate in these sentences is always in the third person; besides, the impersonal sentences doesn’t have the subject, the subject of the action performs a different role in the sentence. Though the predicate of the sentence is in third person, its logical person (as it is a grammatical person) is determined not only in the third person, but in the first and second person.
Logical subject is present in the sentences with abovementioned analytical formant. It can be in one of the three persons. For example:
1. Abishting okshau oilaryn Abaidyng ugyna tuskisi keldi. (Abay wanted to figure out covert thoughts of Abish).
2. Ozimning de aitkym kep zhuretin, irkilgenim zhok. (I was going to say that, so I did not hesitate).
3. Nege ekeni belgisiz Zhaniyanyn bugin bargysy kelmedi. (I don’t know why, but Zhaniya did not want to go).
In the first, second sentences, the subjects in the third person are Abay, Zhaniya, and the subject is in the first person in third sentence (ozim). These persons in the sentences are the subjects of action; the grammatical subject is missing in the sentences, as the words which can be a grammatical subject (Abay, Zhaniya and me) are not in the nominative case, but in the genitive case with a possessive affix. If to check and analyze the grammatical link of words in a sentence, we will not be able to find the subject, moreover, for sentences with this structure it’s impossible. «The main reason for the absence of subject lies in the structure of a compound verb, semantic meanings of words in their composition» [81, 10]
The combination of predicates on their structure can make a simple sentence. For example, let’s take the sentence “korqim keledi”. It seems that this sentence has both the subject and the predicate. However, parsing the sentence, we can prove that it is not true. We cannot consider this structure as an individual sentence or a compound predicate. Determining the parts of speech in the combination “korqim keledi”, the questions “nem keledi?” – “korqim”, “korqim kaitedi?” – “keledi” are not correct as the word “korqim” is not used separately in the sentences and cannot be a part of the speech. The words with possessive affixes stand in first, second and third persons and mean a desire, intention. As the word korqim is a component of the predicate and doesn’t have a full meaning, it accordingly cannot be a grammatical subject. The main feature of impersonal sentences is an inability to be the grammatical subject. There is no grammatical subject in sentences above. G. Madina who studied impersonal sentences in Kazakh language, writes: “In impersonal sentences the subjects of the action are obvious, and they occur in two cases. The first are determined through subjects – personal pronouns of the genitive case, І, ІІ, ІІІ persons (another word is used instead of the pronoun in ІІІ person), that are connected with the verbs in an optative mood. Typically, these are the subjects with possessive affixes. Similarly, an action subject of impersonal sentences is obvious. It is connected with two cases represented in a sentence. Firstly, the subject is determined by the personal pronouns in genitive case connected with possessive affixes in 1, 2, 3 persons added to the predicate in optative mood” [81, 34].
Sometimes the pronouns in genitive case following the example of impersonal sentences occur in nominal form. This fact in turn confirms that the word in genitive case is used as a subject. For example:
1. Abay balasy ozine ondai kurmet zhasaqysy kelgen zhok (Abay’s son did not want that kind of reverence).
2. Bul kisi kesheqi urdisten azhyragysy kelmeidi (This person doesn’t want to loose hold of this procedure).
In these sentences the affixes of genitive case are dropped. But despite this, the meaning of the sentence is preserved. If to add genitive case affixes -nyng, -ning, -dyng, -ding, -tyng, -ting to the subject in sentences “Abay’s son did not want that kind of reverence. This person doesn’t want to loose hold of this procedure”, we get the sentences with unchanged meaning. Despite the fact that in these examples the words in a genitive case take a certain position, they perform the function of a subject on meaning.
The omission of affixes in the words of genitive case that perform the function of a logical subject give an opportunity to determine the subject. We’ll try to explain in two sentences. For example, “Kopshilik Sanany tyngdaqysy keledi” (The majority wants to listen to Sana) and “Kopshilikting Sanany tyngdaqysy keldi” (The majority wanted to listen to Sana). The subject is obvious in the first sentence, and is inconspicuous in the second sentence, but the desire in it is demonstrated stronger.