In A. S. zsoy, D. Akar, M. Nakipolu-Demiralp, E. Erguvanl-Taylan, & A.

Aksu-Ko
(Eds.) (2003). Studies in Turkish linguistics (pp. 259-270). Istanbul: Boazii University
Press.

Codability Effects on the Expression of

Manner of Motion in Turkish and English
eyda zalkan & Dan I. Slobin
University of California, Berkeley
1. Introduction
Current cognitive linguistic research on the underlying conceptual organization of
language has identified the event to be a basic building block of language and cognition
(e.g., Goldberg, 1998; Talmy, 2000). In this study, we focus on a particular type of motion
eventnamely, situations in which an animate being moves from one place to another.
We follow Talmys (1985, 1991, 2000) typological approach to the linguistic encoding of
events. He has proposed a two-way split between the languages of the world in terms of
the way the core feature of an event is expressed linguistically, with some languages
encoding the core feature in the verb, and others in a satellite to the verb (e.g., particles,
prefixes). In his terms, we distinguish between verb-framed and satellite-framed
languages (V-language and S-language), comparing a V-languageTurkish, with an SlanguageEnglish.
In the case of motion events, the path of motion constitutes the core feature of the
event, and languages show two distinct lexicalization patterns, typically encoding path of
motion in either a verb (e.g., exit, ascend) or an associated satellite (e.g., go out, go down)1.
The difference in the way the core feature of an event is expressed has further
consequences for encoding other features of a motion event. Given that S-languages prefer
to encode path by satellites, the main verb slot becomes available for a manner verb2 (e.g.,
walk, run, crawl in, out, across). This provides S-language speakers with an accessible
and easily codable linguistic option for indicating manner of motion. As a consequence, it
appears that S-language speakers habitually encode manner, developing a rich lexicon of
manner verbs and making fine distinctions within the domain of manner (Slobin, 2000,
forthcoming). By contrast, in V-languages the main verb slot is typically reserved to
encode path. However, in contexts where manner is salient and path is encoded by the
main verb, V-language speakers have recourse to alternative means of encoding manner,
such as subordinated manner verb constructions (e.g., enter/exit running) and various
adverbial forms (e.g., dragging ones feet). Such forms increase processing load, and are
only used if manner is at issue. As a consequence, details of manner of movement are
generally omitted in V-languages. These linguistic differences, in turn, are likely to have
effects on the organization of mental representations, leading to different mental imagery
regarding how one navigates in space. Thus, V-language speakers are likely to
conceptualize the domain of manner of movement in a more constrained fashion, due to the
effect of their native language on cognitive processes. Empirical research has provided

evidence for these typological differences, with clear indications that speakers of these two
types of language pay differential attention to manner of motion in speaking or writing
about motion events (e.g., Berman & Slobin, 1994; zalkan, under review; zalkan
& Slobin, 1999, 2000a, 2000b, in press; Slobin, 1996, 1997, 2000, forthcoming). Overall,
S-language speakers show a higher frequency and greater lexical diversity of manner verb
use, as compared to V-language speakers.
In the present research, we investigate the possibility that V-language speakers may
compensate for the typological pattern described above, making use of means for
encoding manner outside of the main verb of a clause describing a motion event. We
examine the use of optional lexical means for encoding manner of motion, comparing an Slanguage, English, with a V-language, Turkish. There are two possible outcomes to such a
comparison: (1) Turkish speakers do not typically elaborate manner of motion, due to
constraints in conflation patterns for encoding path and manner; or (2) given the
availability of alternative lexical means of encoding manner, Turkish speakers may encode
manner information at comparable rates to English speakers. The findings presented below
suggest that the first possibility may be closer to the truth, although alternative means are
used to a certain extent in Turkish.

2. Sample and Procedure

2.1. Written Narratives
The sample consisted of 18 novels, nine of which were originally written in English
and nine in Turkish (see Appendix for list of novels). Twenty episodes were selected at
random from each novel, where an episode is defined as the movement of a major
protagonist, beginning from a stationary position and continuing to move until arriving at
another stationary position where a plot-advancing event occurs. Each episode was coded
for type of motion description. Two sample episodes are presented below (motion verbs
are underlined):
I turned and ran blindly through the archway to the corridors beyond. I caught a
glimpse of the astonished face of the drummer I brushed past him, stumbling, not
looking where I went. Tears blinded my eyes. I did not know what was happening
Then I saw the door leading to the West Wing was open wide, and that someone was
standing there. It was Mrs. Danvers. And then I ran from her, down the long
narrow passage to my own room, tripping, stumbling over the flounces of my dress.
(du Maurier)
Caddeye ktmda film bitmemiti; ehrin bir yerinde bir yerde, benimle pmek
isteyen bir kadn beni bekliyormu gibi bir sabrszlk ve tela vard zerimde. Tnele
koturur gibi yrdm, sonra gerisin geri hzla Galatasaraya dndm ve
umutsuzca, karanlkta birey aranr gibi, bir yzn ansn, bir glmsemeyi, bir
kadn hayalini karmaya altm hatrlyorum. Ama, gene de Taksime gelir
gelmez, bir otobse binmi buldum kendimi. (O. Pamuk)
When I exited to the street, the film was not over yet. I was impatient and agitated as
if some woman who wanted to kiss me were waiting for me somewhere in the city. I

remember walking at a run to Tnel, then returning hastily back to Galatasaray, trying
hopelessly the whole time, as if looking for something in the dark, to capture the
memory of a face, a smile, a womans image. Yet still, as soon as I came to Taksim, I
found myself mounted on a bus.
2.2. Oral Narratives
The sample came from an already collected set of elicited narratives, based on a
picture story-book, Frog, where are you? (Mayer, 1969), in a wide variety of languages
(see Berman & Slobin, 1994). The story is rich in motion events of many types. For this
study, we used data collected from English- and Turkish-speaking adults3. All the subjects
were monolinguals, coming from middle-class, literate backgrounds, ranging from 18 to 40
years of age. There were about 30 subjects in each language. Subjects were interviewed
individually and asked to first look through the entire picture book and then tell the story
while looking at the pictures. Each interview was audiotaped and transcribed for future
analysis. The stories were further coded for motion events. The categories of motion verbs
included in the analysis were the following:
V:manner (manner verbs), e.g., run, fly; yr walk, trman climb-up
V:path (path verbs), e.g., enter, exit, follow; in descend, k exit, yakla
approach
V:neutral (verbs with no manner or path) ,e.g., go, move; git go, hareket et
move
V+V:manner (SUB) (subordinated manner verbs), e.g., go running; yuvarlanarak
d fall rolling.

3. Findings
3.1. Verbs of Motion
Analysis at the level of motion verb use suggested a clear typological contrast. As
can be seen in Table 1, novels written in English included more manner verbs (51% of all
motion verbs) than novels written in Turkish (30%). Turkish novels, on the other hand,
mainly relied on path verbs (59%) in describing motion events.
Table 1: Percentage* of motion verb use in literary texts
V:manner V:path
V:neutral V+V:manner(SUB)
51%
27%
20%
2%
English
30%
59%
7%
4%
Turkish
*Percentages are based on the total number of motion verbs in each language

Several examples from the data are presented below, illustrating differences in motion verb
choice between the two languages (motion verbs are underlined):
(1) I began to scramble up the slippery rocks in the direction of the bank. Great,
jagged boulders screened the view, and I slipped and stumbled on the wet rocks,
making my way as best as I could in Jaspers direction. (du Maurier)

(2) But Kino was pushing his way through the crowd. his raged blood pounded in his
ears, and he burst through and strode away. (Steinbeck)
(3) Evde insan varm da ekiniyormu gibi ayaklarnn ucuna basarak odasndan kt.
Sofay usul usul geti. Oluyla gelininin yatak odasna geldi. Kap kilitli deildi, itip
girdi. (O. Kemal)
She exited from her room on tiptoe, as if there was someone in the house. She
crossed the hallway quietly quietly. She came to the bedroom of his son and his bride.
The door was unlocked, she pushed it and entered.
(4) Geceyarsna kadar ehrin sokaklarnda dolatm durdum. Sleymaniye Camiinin
avlusuna girdim, Atatrk Kprsnden getim, Beyoluna ktm. (O. Pamuk)
I wandered on the streets of the city till midnight. I entered the courtyard of
Sleymaniye Mosque, I crossed Atatrk Bridge, I ascended to Beyolu.
The same pattern held true for the diversity of the manner lexicon in the two
languages. Novels in English contained a manner lexicon almost twice as varied (64 types)
as Turkish novels (26 types). Lists of all the manner verbs used in the novels are presented
below:
English: bolt, burst, chase, cut, clamber, crawl, climb, creep, dart, dip, dive, drag oneself,
drift, edge ones way, flee, glide, grope ones way, hasten, hurry, hurl oneself, jump, leap,
limp, loiter, lunge, march, pace, peel off, plod, plunge, pour, pull away, push ones way,
race, reel, run, rush, rustle, scramble, shuffle, sift, skip, skitter, slide, slip, sneak, splash,
spring, sprint, step, stoop, stride, strike, stroll, stumble, tramp, tiptoe, track, tread, wade,
wander, walk, weave, work ones way
Turkish: adm at step, atla jump, atl leap, at kendini throw oneself, bat sink,
ullan move forward forcefully, dal plunge, dolan wander, dola wander, dkl
pour, emekle crawl, frla dart, gez stroll, hopla hop, ka flee, kay slide, ko
run, sek skip, seirt run, sendele stumble, sra hop, szl sneak trman climb,
yl collapse, yuvarlan roll, yr walk
Novelists writing in English also made finer distinctions within particular domains of
manner. Typically, for a single verb in Turkish that described a motion with manner,
English texts had two or more verbs that described the same motion. Some examples from
the data are presented below:
Turkish
atla jump
dal plunge
emekle crawl

English
jump, scramble, sprint, spring
dip, dive, plunge
crawl, creep

atl leap
firla dart
ko, seirt run
trman climb-up
yr walk

leap, lunge
bolt, burst, dart
run, race, rush, reel
climb, clamber
walk, drift, loiter, march, pace, plod, rustle, shuffle, sift,
skitter, sneak, stride, tiptoe, tramp, tread, wade, weave

The pattern was the same for the elicited narratives from adult native speakers. More
than half of the motion verbs used by English speakers were manner verbs (54%), as
compared to less than one third used by Turkish speakers (30%) (see Table 2).
Table 2: Percentage* of motion verb use in adult frog stories
V:manner V:path
V:neutral V+V:m (SUB)
54%
30%
15%
1%
English
30%
62%
7%
1%
Turkish
*Percentages are based on the total number of motion verbs in each language.

Similar to novels, narratives elicited in English contained a manner lexicon that was
twice as varied (35 types) as Turkish (18 types). For example, the following manner verbs
were used in describing a particular scene from the stimulus bookthe frogs exit from the
jar): English: the frog: runs away, jumps out, hops out, climbs out, crawls out, creeps out,
slips out, sneaks out, steps out, tiptoes out, escapes; Turkish: kurbaa: kayor, atlyor,
trmanr, syrlr the frog: flees, jumps, climbs up, sneaks off.
In summary, the analysis of motion verbs strongly supports the typological dichotomy
between the two languages in encoding manner of motion. Productions in English (Slanguage) included a greater frequency (52% to 30%) and diversity (80 types to 32 types)
of manner verbs than productions in Turkish (V-language), and this difference was found
in both written texts and elicited oral narratives (see Figure 1).
3.2. Verbs of Motion: Subordination of Manner and Aspectual Marking
Figure 1
Manner verb use in English and Turkish
(written and elicited narratives combined)
90

80 types

English
Turkish

80
70
60

52%

50
40

30%

32 types

30
20
10
0
V:manner:TOKEN

V:manner:TYPE

As pointed out earlier, the encoding of manner information in a V-language

typically involves heavier syntactic packaging (e.g., subordinate constructions), and as a
consequence it seems that this option is dispreferred by V-language speakers. The
dispreference is quite evident in the Turkish data, where subordinated manner verbs
constituted only 4% of all motion verb use (written and oral narratives combined). The two
typical ways of forming such subordinations were either repeated verbs in nominalized
form (koa koa gitti go running running) or converb constructions (ayaklarnn ucuna
basarak kt exited press-CONVERB on the ends of the feet [=tiptoeing]). Some
examples from the Turkish data are presented below (subordinated manner expressions are
underlined):
(5) Kayadan kayaya atlayarak uca kadar geldi. (O. Kemal)
Jumping from rock to rock he came all the way to the front.
(6) Elde fener seke seke dere boyuna varld. (Tekin)
With lantern in their hands, they reached the riverside hopping hopping
(7) Srklenerek divann kapsndan uzaklat. (Y. Kemal)
He moved away from the door of the divan being dragged.
(8) Galip bfeden kar kmaz hzl hzl Nianta meydanna doru yrd
koa koa sinemaya gitti (O. Pamuk)
As soon as he exited from the shop, Galip walked rapidly rapidly to Nianta
Squarehe went to the movie theater running running.
The inflectional morphology of Turkish provides another relatively easy, but
somewhat constrained option of marking manner on the verb by means of aspectual
suffixes attached to the motion verb root. A purely directional verb such as gir enter with
an aspectual suffix iver give (gir-iver enter-give) conveys manner information
(suddenness) along with path. However, this aspectual suffix is very limited in its use, only
adding a nuance of suddenness to whatever verb its is attached to. It is not very
commonly used in everyday speech, and there are only two instances in our data, one
written (9) and one oral (10).
(9) nnde aniden bir otobsn durduunu grd. Kap alnca, uursuzca giriverdi.
(O.Kemal)
He saw a bus stopping in front of him all of a sudden. When the door opened, he
entered suddenly (enter-give) without thinking.
(10) (Kurbaa) kavanozdan kavermi. (elicited narrative)
The frog suddenly escaped (escape-give) from the jar.

In summary, the domain of manner of motion was much less differentiated in

Turkish productions, as compared to English. The difference was evident both in terms of
the amount of manner verb use and the richness of the manner verb lexicon. We expected
this result, given the higher codability of manner information in English, which allows for
conflation of motion with manner in the main verb along with coding of path in satellites.
Although alternative means are available to Turkish speakerseither via subordinated
manner verb constructions or aspectual suffixes of mannerthese options were very rarely
used. However, there are other ways of describing or suggesting manner of movement. If
Turkish does not provide easily codable manner expressions in association with the verb,
do speakers use alternative lexical means of encoding this information?
3.3. Alternative Lexical Means
Various alternative lexical means are availablein both English and Turkishfor
communicating information about manner of movement:

adverbial expressions that describe or suggest manner of movement, e.g.,

evden yel gibi kt he exited from the house like the wind, she walked in a
crippled way
descriptions of internal state or physical condition of a moving entity,
allowing one to infer manner of movement, e.g., he was exhausted
descriptions of features of the physical setting that could influence manner of
movement, e.g., the trail was steep and slippery.

It is possible that V-language speakers make frequent use of such alternative means to
encode manner of motion, thus compensating for the relative difficulty of encoding both
path and manner in verbal constructions. Table 3 presents findings with regard to the use
of alternative lexical means for encoding manner in the two languages.
Table 3: Frequency distribution of alternative lexical means of encoding manner in novels
and elicited oral narratives
English
Turkish
novels
elicitations
novels
elicitations
total
total
73
27
93
43
adverbials
100
136
34
16
20
5
descriptions
50
25
107
43
113
148
TOTAL
150
161
The data show that Turkish and English productions both make fairly frequent use of
alternative lexical means of conveying manner. Combining the novels and the elicited oral
narratives, there are 150 uses of alternative means in English and 161 in Turkish.
Adverbial specifications of manner of movement constituted the major option in both
languages, with Turkish productions showing a higher amount of use: an overall total of
100 uses in English to 136 in Turkish. However, English writers and speakers provided

twice as many indirect evocations of manner: 50 descriptions to 25 in Turkish. We will

attempt to interpret these patterns after an overview of typical examples.
Adverbials:
She ran like a chased person fleeing from the crazy-house. (McCullers)
He jumped up like a coiled spring. (Anaya)
All the bees are coming out at a thousand miles an hour. (elicited narrative)
Nedenini bilmeden, ardmdan biri hafife drtm gibi, yrmem, bir yerlere gitmem
gerektiini dnerek, sakntyla, ar ar, bir ayam neredeyse tekinin burnuna
dayayarak ilerlemee alacam. (Karasu)
Not knowing the reason, as if someone has prodded me, thinking that I must walk,
go somewhere, cautiously, slowly, almost pressing one foot on the tip of the other, I
will try to move forward.
Kurbaa kavanozdan emin admlarla syrld. (elicited narrative)
The frog slipped out of the jar with confident steps.
Kpek de yava yava suda yzmektedir. (elicited narrative)
And the dog was swimming slowly slowly in the water.
Descriptions
He was sweating heavily and his thigh muscles were twitchy from the steepness of the
climb. (Hemingway)
I turned once more to the steep path through the woods, my legs reluctant, my head heavy,
a strange sense of foreboding in my heart. (du Maurier)
Bylece Alinin yanna varncaya kadar geen ve hi bitmeyecek gibi gelen birka adm
boyunca Lamia aknlktan inanmazla, inanmazlktan fke ve hrnla dt.
(Yeinobal)
During the time that passed till she reached Ali and the few steps she took that felt as
if it would take forever, Lamia fell from surprise to disbelief, from disbelief to anger
and uneasiness.
Bayku rahatsz edildii iin ok kzm ve ocuun stne doru geliyor. (elicited
narrative)
The owl is very angry because of being disturbed and is coming over towards the
boy.

There are important differences in the uses of the two types of manner elaboration in
English and Turkish. In English productions, such expressions of manner were more likely
to accompany manner verbs, whereas in Turkish they were more likely to qualify nonmanner verbs, suggesting a difference between the two languages in the functions of
extended manner expressions. The fact that English speakers used them predominantly
with manner verbs (73%), suggests that they served the function of augmenting the manner
that was already encoded by the verb. By contrast, the high rate in Turkish with nonmanner verbs (61%) suggests the prevalence of a compensatory function in the Vlanguage. That is, English speakershaving already specified manner by choice of a
manner verb, go on to elaborate or extend the description: not just sneak, but sneak quietly;
not just jump up, but jump up like a coiled spring. For Turkish speakers, by contrast, it is
typically only the adverbial expression that indicates manner. This contrast between the
two language types is even more marked with regard to descriptions that only suggest
manner. Here the English productionsboth the written novels and the oral narratives
provide abundant ancillary information about inner states and conditions of the terrain,
suggesting an overall greater and more differentiated attention to the ways in which
animate beings move from place to place.

4. Summary and Conclusions

The analysis of written texts and elicited narratives produced by native speakers of
the two languages clearly suggests a strong typological influence on the encoding of
manner of motion. Overall, English speakers/writers, in comparison with Turkish
speakers/writers, encoded manner of motion at a higher ratein terms of both token and
type frequency of manner-of-motion verbs, as well as more elaborate use of alternative
lexical means of indicating manner. English speakers/writers also made more fine-grained
distinctions within the domain of manner, using a much richer lexicon of manner verbs as
compared to Turkish speakers/writers. The findings also suggest a difference in the
function of alternative lexical means of encoding manner in the two languages: Turkish
speakers use these means mainly to add manner information to basic motion event
descriptions, apparently compensating for what they cannot easily encode at the level of
motion verb constructions. On the other hand, English speakers use such means
predominantly to elaborate or augment the manner that has already been encoded by the
verb. Thus comparable linguistic forms serve different functions in the two language
types, due to basic differences in lexicalization patterns.
Relying on these findings, it could be argued that native speakers producing texts
in a V-framed language type, such as Turkish, have recourse to mental images of motion
event scenes with less focus on manner of movement, as compared to speakers of an Sframed language, such as English. That is, Turkish speakersand speakers of other Vlanguagesare likely to conceptualize the domain of manner of movement in a more
constrained fashion, due to the effects of linguistic structure on cognitive processes (Slobin,
2000).

10

Notes
1

The satellite-framed construction type applies to most Indo-European languages except

Romance, along with Finno-Ugric, Chinese, and various Amerindian languages. Verbframed languages include Turkic, Semitic, and Romance languages, along with Japanese,
Korean, Basque, as well as signed languages (American Sign Language, Sign Language of
the Netherlands) (Slobin, 1997, forthcoming; Slobin & Hoiting, 1994).
2

Manner refers to factors such as motor pattern, rate, and degree of effort of the figures
movement. Path refers to the translational motion of a figure, which, in the most
elaborated sense, moves from a source to a goal through some medium, passing one or
more milestones.
3

The Turkish data were gathered by Ayhan Aksu-Ko (1994) and Aylin Kntay in
Istanbul. The English data were collected by Virginia Marchman and Tanya Renner in
California (Berman & Slobin, 1994) and by Gillian Wigglesworth in Australia.

References
Berman, R. A., & Slobin, D. I. (1994). Relating events in narrative: A crosslinguistic developmental
study. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goldberg, A. E. (1998). Patterns of experience in patterns of language. In M. Tomasello (Ed.), The
new psychology of language (pp. 203-219). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
zalkan, . (under review). Contrastive effect of narrative perspective vs. typological constraints
in encoding manner of motion: A developmental look.
zalkan, ., & Slobin, D. I. (1999a). Learning how to search for the frog: Expression of manner
of motion in English, Spanish, and Turkish. In A. Greenhill, H. Littlefield, & C. Tano (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp.
541-552). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
zalkan, ., & Slobin, D. I. (1999b, July). How children encode motion events in two types of
languages. Poster presented at the Eighth International Congress for the Study of Child
Language. San Sebastin, Spain.
zalkan, ., & Slobin, D. I. (2000). Climb up vs. ascend climbing: Lexicalization choices in
expressing motion events with manner and path components. In S. Catherine-Howell, S. A.
Fish & K. Lucas (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on
Language Development (pp. 558-570). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
zalkan, ., & Slobin, D. I. (in press). Expression of manner of movement in monolingual and
bilingual adult narratives: Turkish vs. English. In A. Gksel & C. Kerslake (Eds.), Studies
on Turkish and Turkic Languages. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag.
zyrek, A., & zalkan, . (2000). How do children learn to conflate manner and path in their
speech and gestures? In E. Clark (Ed.), Proceedings of the 30th Stanford Child Language
Research Forum (pp.77-85). Palo Alto, CA: CSLI.

11

Slobin, D. I. (1996). Two ways to travel: Verbs of motion in English and Spanish. In M. Shibatani
& S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays in semantics (pp. 195-217). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Slobin, D. I. (1997). Mind, code, and text. In J. Bybee, J. Haiman, & S. A. Thompson (Eds.), Essays
on language function and language type: Dedicated to T. Givn (pp. 437-467).
Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Slobin, D. I. (2000). Verbalized events: A dynamic approach to linguistic relativity and determinism.
In S. Niemeier & R. Dirven (Eds.), Evidence for linguistic relativity (pp. 107-138). Berlin:
Mouton de Gruyter.
Slobin, D. I. (forthcoming). Language and thought online: Cognitive consequences of linguistic
relativity. To appear in volume edited by D. Gentner.
Slobin, D. I., & Hoiting, N. (1994). Reference to movement in spoken and signed languages:
Typological considerations. Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual Meeting of the
Berkeley Linguistics Society, 487-505.
Talmy, Leonard. (1991). Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Proceedings of the
Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 480-519.
Talmy, L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics. Vol. II: Typology and process in concept
structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Appendix
English novels: R. Anaya (1972), Bless me, ltima; A. S. Byatt (1990), Possession: A romance;
J. Derbyshire (1996), Seeing Calvin Coolidge in a dream; D. du Maurier (1938), Rebecca;
J. Fowles (1969), The French lieutenants woman; E. Hemingway (1941), For whom the bell
tolls; D. Lessing (1952), A proper marriage; C. McCullers (1946), The member of the wedding;
J. Steinbeck (1947), The pearl
Turkish novels: O. Atay (1971), Tutanamayanlar; K. Baar (1992), Sen olsaydn yapmazdn
biliyorum; Frzan (1974), Parasz yatl, 47liler; B. Karasu (1985), Gece; O. Kemal (1960),
El kz; Y. Kemal (1970), Arda efsanesi; O. Pamuk (1990), Kara kitap; L. Tekin (1984),
Berci Kristin p masallar; N. Yeinobal (1997), Mazi kalbimde bir yaradr