Aspect and Institutional Time I: Backgrounded Continuity
C1
Architecture
1. Function
This lesson focuses on Normalization through Continuity.
The -Agelen constructions ( süregelen, yapılagelen, uygulanagelen ) are not markers of duration.
They are instruments of institutional inertia.
Their strategic function is Contextual Anchoring:
• to embed present actions within a long historical arc
• to remove the perception of novelty or disruption
• to transform decisions into inevitable outcomes of continuity
If a process is framed as süregelen, it is positioned as:
• already normalized
• historically validated
• structurally resistant to challenge
This is not explanation.
It is authority derived from time.
2. Forms
Habitual–Durative Constructions
• süregelen — continuity sustained across institutional cycles
• yapılagelen — inherited practice framed as tradition
• uygulanagelen — policy stabilized through repeated implementation
• izlenegelen — methodology maintained over time
These forms stabilize the background so that change appears organic rather than imposed.
3. Morphology
Directive–Durative Logic
The morphology of -Agelen encodes historical force:
• -A — directional vector
• gel- — movement arriving from the past
The present is framed not as a decision point, but as an arrival zone.
What exists now is not chosen; it has come to be.
This is how language produces historical inevitability.
4. Structural Guide
Inertia Architecture
[Habitual Context (-Agelen)] + [Current Implementation] → [Institutional Legitimacy]
Strategic Outcome:
By establishing continuity first, institutions insulate new actions from scrutiny.
The background absorbs resistance; the foreground proceeds.
5. Usage
Strategic Deployment Framework
The -Agelen structures are deployed tactically in three high-stakes domains:
• Regulatory Defense
Frames policies as uygulanagelen, shifting the burden of proof to regulators.
• M&A Justifications
Positions integration as restoration of continuity rather than disruption.
• Crisis Continuity
Signals that institutional memory exceeds the crisis itself.
Examples
A) Core Analytical Example
Kurumumuzda uzun yıllardır süregelen risk yönetimi yaklaşımı, şeffaflık ve hesap verebilirlik ilkeleri üzerine inşa edilmiştir.
— The risk management approach that has long been ongoing within our institution has been built upon the principles of transparency and accountability.
Here, süregelen removes the practice from debate and places it within inherited structure.
B) Executive Masterpiece
Son elli yıldır uygulanagelen kurumsal denetim anlayışının bir tezahürü olarak, dijital altyapıya geçiş süreci, süregelen kurumsal bütünlüğün doğal bir uzantısı olarak konumlandırılmıştır.
— As a manifestation of the institutional audit philosophy that has been applied for the past fifty years, the transition to digital infrastructure has been positioned as a natural extension of ongoing institutional integrity.
C) Surgical Deconstruction
• Backgrounded Shield
son elli yıldır uygulanagelen kurumsal denetim anlayışı → historical immunity
• Foregrounded Change
dijital altyapıya geçiş süreci → framed as consequence, not initiative
• Rhetorical Lock
konumlandırılmıştır → deliberate positioning, not action
The change is rhetorically immunized by continuity.
Notes
Rhetorical Immunization
Pre-emptive Strike: The -Agelen constructions do not merely indicate duration; they function as a rhetorical shield that pre-empts objections before they are voiced.
Escalation of Stakes: Framing a decision as süregelen or uygulanagelen shifts the debate from the specific policy to the institution's historical trajectory.
The Legitimacy Trap: To challenge a decision anchored in this way is to challenge the institution’s entire historical legacy—moving the conflict from the realm of policy to the realm of legitimacy itself.
Institutional Gravity: In institutional time, backgrounded continuity provides the gravity that holds new decisions in place, making them appear structurally inevitable.
Aspect and Institutional Time I: Backgrounded Continuity – FAQ (C1)
Q: What do –Agelen constructions express in institutional Turkish?
A: –Agelen constructions frame actions as part of an established historical continuity. They remove the sense of novelty and present current practices as normalized and validated over time.
Q: Why are forms like süregelen or uygulanagelen not simple duration markers?
A: They do not merely indicate that something lasts. They function as rhetorical tools that anchor actions in institutional inertia and make them resistant to challenge.
Q: How does backgrounded continuity support institutional legitimacy?
A: By establishing continuity first, new actions appear as natural outcomes rather than decisions. This shifts debate away from the present action toward the institution’s historical trajectory.