Gecekondu are informal settlements that have been at the heart of the rapid urbanisation of modern Turkey, especially in Istanbul and Izmir. Gecekondu squatting started in the 1940s as a need-oriented practice of poor rural migrants who needed cheap accomodation in Turkey's growing cities. Over time, gecekondu neighborhoods were legalized, and their dwellers became part of the urban middle class by erecting apartment buildings on their plots. In the 1980s, it became common to buy, and later to steal, privately owned agricultural land in order to construct apartment buildings on it. Appropriation was no longer geared towards need, but towards profit.
Appropriation of state-owned (agricultural) land was already a common practice in Ottoman times, and so was rural work migration to major cities, such as Istanbul and Izmir. In the aftermath of the Armenian Genocide and the Population Exchange with Greece, private property of Armenians and Greeks was appropriated and squatted by Muslims. This article argues that these historical precedents informed the way in which gecekondu dwellers legitimated their need-oriented appropriation of state land. With the arrival of neoliberalism, however, appropriation of state property no longer served to alleviate poverty, but became big business. Today, it is major real estate firms and the state-owned public housing authority (TOKI) that privatize state land in order to build gated communities for the upper middle class.
This article studies the application of laws regulating the settlement and compensation of
migrants who came to Turkey from Greece in the course of the population exchange. By
using petitions and administrative documents, it discusses the questions of legality and
legitimacy with regard to two problems: First, the status of exchangees as a group privileged
by law, and second, the bureaucratic procedure through which they were given temporary
property rights (tefvīż ). The article shows that laws can by no means be taken to be identical
with their application, and that various notions of legality and legitimacy were at play, both in
different state administrations and among those affected by their policies. It thus makes an
important contribution to a better understanding of the relationship between law, state and
society in early Republican Turkey.
While the be-perfect (BEP) is found in a number of (particularly European)
languages, in English it has almost exclusively been considered from a diachronic
perspective, and is commonly seen as a dying structure in present-day
varieties. In contrast, previous acceptability and corpus studies have indicated
that the BEP persists as a formal variant. Against the backdrop of this apparently
conflicting evidence, in this paper I take a closer look at this “zombie” structure.
With the help of data from the International Corpus of English (ICE) and the Corpus
of Global Web-based English (GloWbE), I aim at updating and sharpening the synchronic
perspective on the BEP. In particular, I (re-)address whether the BEP has
really “died” or rather still represents a productive pattern in present-day varieties
of English. In this connection, lexical restrictions are considered as important
indicators, and the role of different factors favoring the BEP as well as its potential
status as a vernacular universal are discussed.
Among the time-reference forms of English, the acquisition of the
present perfect is regarded as the single most challenging task for non-native
speakers, mainly due to the semantic peculiarities of this form in contrast to
many other languages. In this chapter, we focus on variation between the present
perfect and the simple past in German-speaking learners to assess the influence
of learner proficiency level and mode on the use of the present perfect. Our results
suggest that (i) the present perfect is more frequent in writing, and (ii) emerges
very late in learner language, such that only the most advanced learners, and
specifically those who started learning English very early in primary school, use
it as frequently as native speakers. This finding tentatively supports proponents
of early English language teaching. To explain the results, we explore potential
reasons for the late emergence of the present perfect, and conclude with specific
recommendations for English language teaching.
In the context of the arts and humanities, heterogeneity largely corresponds to the variety of disciplines, their research questions and communities. Resulting from the diversity of the application domain, the analysis of overall requirements and the subsequent derivation of appropriate unifying schemata is prevented by the complexity and size of the domain. The approach presented in this paper is based on the hypothesis that data integration problems in the arts and humanities can be solved on the theoretical foundation of formal languages. In applying a theoretically substantiated framework, integrative solutions on the formal basis of language specifications can be tailored to specific and individual research needs—abstracting from reoccurring technical difficulties and leading the focus of domain experts on semantic aspects.