The phenomenon of valence expresses elements carried by a verb according to its meaning(s), and can vary across languages. In essence, the valence actualizes the intended meaning of a verb. However, the valence can change depending on linguistic processes such as meaning, form, and syntax. A verb may govern a different valence in each dialect in which it is used. Accordingly, the valency potential of a verb can change because of such alterations. For example, in Turkey Turkish, the verb “taşı-” meaning “to carry something from one place to another” logically accepts four valency slots: -Gördüm, diyor, [trenler] [Ankara’dan] [Eskişehir’e] boyuna [asker] taşıyor ve Eskişehir’den Ankara’ya vagon dolusu erzak gidiyordu. (Karaosmanoğlu, 2019, p. 78) [who: agent] + [what: theme] + [to who: destination] + [from who: source] + taşı-. “I saw, he says, trains were carrying soldiers from Ankara to Eskişehir, and from Eskişehir to Ankara, wagonloads of provisions were going.” The verb taşı- opens four valence spaces: the object performing the action, the object whose position changes when the action is relized, the place in which the action originates, and the place to which the action is directed. It also reveals two valence gaps: the object that performs the action in the sense of “to bear the weight of an object” and the object whose position changes when the action is completed: [O] [Hemen kendi kadar büyük olan bu kızı] inleye sıkıla taşıyor. (Adıvar, 2022, p. 348) [who: agent] + [whom: theme] + taşı-. “[He] carries this girl, who is immediately as big as himself, groaning and straining.” 

French linguist Lucien Tesnière is considered the founder of the valency theory. Tesnière compared the potential of atoms to govern electrons as their dependents: the number of gaps presented by a verb and therefore the number of actants it is likely to govern reveals the valence of the verb (1959, p. 238). Tesnière believed that verbs ruled sentences and stated that every verb has an “actant” that it attaches to itself. Verbs display different images in terms of the number of actants they make dependent on them. All verbs do not control the same number of actants, and the number of actants available to a particular verb is not always the same (1959, p. 105-106).

 Tahsin Banguoğlu is considered to be the first researcher to use the term “valence” in studies conducted in Turkey. Banguoğlu stated in his “Türkçenin Grameri” that transitive verbs generally desire objects in [whom] and [who] situations and in such instances, the verb is labeled a “requestor” and the noun situation is named the “requested.” Banguoğlu defined the term valence saying, “We also call this state of the object according to the verb.” Banguoğlu also asserted that some verbs change their valences along the evolutionary scale of a language and that certain transitive verbs could want the [to who] status as exemplified by at-ıg mündi ~ at-ı bindi ~ at-a bindi (2004, p. 528).

 Studies on valence have gained momentum in Turkey in recent years. Numerous studies have been conducted on this subject in one aspect, albeit not explicitly using the term valence. The relevant studies have generally focused on themes such as the case suffixes accepted by verbs, alternations encountered in such suffixes and the reasons for the alternations, the differences in the case suffixes accepted by the verbs through the evolutionary process of the language, and the reasons for these differences. Many studies have also been conducted using the modern demand theory.

 The present study aims to determine the meanings of the verb ur- and its urul-, urdur-, uruş- derivatives in Karachay-Balkar and to explore the valence patterns of these verbs based on these meanings. Given the extensive usage and semantic diversity of the verb ur- and its derivatives urul-, urdur-, uruş-, their meanings were determined by examining novels, stories, plays, biographies, critiques, dictionaries, and other works written in Karachay-Balkar. These meanings were classified, and the actants and semantic roles governed by the verbs were identified based on these meanings. The valence of the verb ur- was found to change because of the narrowing and widening of meanings and the polysemy of the verb. It was observed that an increase or decrease in valence occurs in the derivatives of the verb ur- because of passivity, causativization, and cooperative functions.

It is crucial to know the valence potential of verbs in interdialectal transfers, especially for common verbs that are utilized across dialects. Varied errors can occur in transfers across dialects if valence choices are made without knowing the valence of the verb in the source dialect. Such errors can be significantly minimized by revealing the valence of verbs and even compiling valence dictionaries for common verbs employed across dialects.