Lesson 19
Beginner
Beginner
Where Should We Go Out?
Need to tell someone about that hot new restaurant in that hip new neighborhood you discovered last weekend? Well, you cool cat you, you're going to need some locative adjectives to express your bad self.
Psst! Want to access
everything in this lesson?
everything in this lesson?
Şeyma
oh guys you're a blessing! I've been looking for a Turkish center in my city for years and I was really disappoined when I couldn't find one .. but who needs a Turkish center when I can learn at home!? THANK YOU! ^_^
Apr 05, 2013
Aylin
Thanks so much! :D
Chuck
I finally got all the Review questions right without having to ask for help. Thanks for the site. It's great
Ryan
I cant get past the final question
Im trying to translate, 'I like the ones in London'
so..
Londra'dakınalar seviyorum
but its wrong? What am I doing wrong?
Im trying to translate, 'I like the ones in London'
so..
Londra'dakınalar seviyorum
but its wrong? What am I doing wrong?
Justin
Hi! So, you've got a few small issues that I'll help you fix up :)
First, remember that "ki" doesn't follow vowel harmony. So, it's never kı, ku, or kü. Just ki.
Second, you don't need an "a" after "daki." I'm not sure why you added it, but you can just add "lar" directly after daki.
Finally, notice that "the ones in London" is the object of the verb seviyorum. We're going to need accusative ;-)
Hope that helps :)
First, remember that "ki" doesn't follow vowel harmony. So, it's never kı, ku, or kü. Just ki.
Second, you don't need an "a" after "daki." I'm not sure why you added it, but you can just add "lar" directly after daki.
Finally, notice that "the ones in London" is the object of the verb seviyorum. We're going to need accusative ;-)
Hope that helps :)
Ryan
Ok, so based on my understanding of vowel harmony ''daki'' should be ''dakiLER'' not ''_LAR''?
Also, I'm going to need more help in using accusative.
So now I have Londra'dakilar bir seviyorum which still isn't right
Also, I'm going to need more help in using accusative.
So now I have Londra'dakilar bir seviyorum which still isn't right
Justin
Yes, you're absolutely right. The correct plural suffix here is -ler.
So, Londra'dakiler.
We need the accusative here to mark Londra'dakiler as the direct object of seviyorum. What do I like? I like Londra'dakiler. So we need to write Londra'dakileri.
We don't need the "bir" at all here.
So, that should be it. Got it now? :)
So, Londra'dakiler.
We need the accusative here to mark Londra'dakiler as the direct object of seviyorum. What do I like? I like Londra'dakiler. So we need to write Londra'dakileri.
We don't need the "bir" at all here.
So, that should be it. Got it now? :)
Ryan
Got it :)
Robin
Justin. I am a bit hazy on accusative, which lesson should I look at to brush up? Thanks as always. Robin
Justin
Check out lesson 10. It was one of our early lessons so let me know if you think we can do a better job and we will make another one :)
Robin
Thanks. I had not done 10 yet, just working through Beginners first, will check it out now however. Robin
Öğrenci
wow thanks, finally feel I'm getting somewhere with my turkish
Alan
Alan
Magi
Great site, fantastic! Would it be possible to tell us where to find certain grammar points within the lessons or perhaps cross reference from the grammar section? i.e. I would like to revise the present simple tense but don't know which lesson/s it might come up in...
Cotton Panda
Justin...help please..."Bu araba anahtarı değil.
Translate |These aren't car keys." Why isn't the translation,"this isn't the car key" and I was thinking that," This is your house key" would be, "Ev anahtarın+ı". While "these are your house keys would be,"Bunlar ev anahtarını". Errr, "Bunlar ev anahtarlarını"? Help...
Translate |These aren't car keys." Why isn't the translation,"this isn't the car key" and I was thinking that," This is your house key" would be, "Ev anahtarın+ı". While "these are your house keys would be,"Bunlar ev anahtarını". Errr, "Bunlar ev anahtarlarını"? Help...
Justin
@Cotton Panda
Let's see - there are a few things going on here.
First, you're right. "This isn't the car key" is a perfectly acceptable translation of that sentence. Sometimes Turkish uses singular nouns where we use plural (in cases where you are not literally speaking about multiple things). In this case, though, I think your translation is more clear and I'll go in and change it now.
On your second point about "This is your house key." It looks like you want to add an accusative suffix at the end? But in order to use the accusative in Turkish, you (at least) need to have a verb. The implied "is" in Turkish verbless sentences never forces the accusative.
Or, maybe you thought that was the compound noun suffix? When you possess a compound noun in Turkish, you only add *one* suffix for both the compound noun and the possession. So, swimming pool is "yüzme havuzu," and *my* swimming pool is "yüzme havuzum." That possessed suffix does double duty.
Does that clear things up? If not, let me know.
Let's see - there are a few things going on here.
First, you're right. "This isn't the car key" is a perfectly acceptable translation of that sentence. Sometimes Turkish uses singular nouns where we use plural (in cases where you are not literally speaking about multiple things). In this case, though, I think your translation is more clear and I'll go in and change it now.
On your second point about "This is your house key." It looks like you want to add an accusative suffix at the end? But in order to use the accusative in Turkish, you (at least) need to have a verb. The implied "is" in Turkish verbless sentences never forces the accusative.
Or, maybe you thought that was the compound noun suffix? When you possess a compound noun in Turkish, you only add *one* suffix for both the compound noun and the possession. So, swimming pool is "yüzme havuzu," and *my* swimming pool is "yüzme havuzum." That possessed suffix does double duty.
Does that clear things up? If not, let me know.
Silvia
Hello,
what is the correct form of yatakdaki yastık?
thank you
what is the correct form of yatakdaki yastık?
thank you
Justin
Merhaba Silvia!
You would use "yatak + taki" since that "da" suffix needs to change to "t" to match the whispered "k."
You would use "yatak + taki" since that "da" suffix needs to change to "t" to match the whispered "k."
Silvia
Merhaba! tesekkurler!!
I imagined! So as you said in the lesson, the only word that doesnt change is "ki".
I imagined! So as you said in the lesson, the only word that doesnt change is "ki".
Justin
Aynen öyle ;)
Dex
"köşeler" means "they are in the corner"? doesn't it just mean "corners"?
Justin
Yep, or "they are corners" :)
Good catch. It should be "köşedeler." Çok teşekkür ederiz.
Good catch. It should be "köşedeler." Çok teşekkür ederiz.
Josef
Merhaba Justin,
Can you this ki thing with the ablative ending too? For example Izmir'denki = the one from Izmir?
Ta,
Josef
Can you this ki thing with the ablative ending too? For example Izmir'denki = the one from Izmir?
Ta,
Josef
Martha
Here is how I remember what -deki/-daki means: -de/-da means "in," "at" or "on." -ki means "that," yes? So, the ones "that" are "on" the table. Masadakiler.
And -ki does not change according to vowel harmony because it originally comes from Persian, yes? Knowing this helps me remember not to try to change that vowel.
Bu ders için teşekkürler!
And -ki does not change according to vowel harmony because it originally comes from Persian, yes? Knowing this helps me remember not to try to change that vowel.
Bu ders için teşekkürler!
Justin
@Josef - Nope. It can't go on -den. You would say "O İzmirden" or "İzmirli."
@ Martha - Çok rica ederiz :)
Yep, you're intuition about -ki is all correct!
@ Martha - Çok rica ederiz :)
Yep, you're intuition about -ki is all correct!
Can
If it helps; I've also been told that the -deki/-daki can roughly be translated as "that.../who..../which...."
Ex: "Masadaki anahtarı" - The key THAT is on the table.
I this case; what is it that can be described about the key? It's on the table.
Other Ex:
"Bahçedeki çocuk" - The child WHO is in the garden
"Evdeki köpek" - The dog THAT is in the house
"New York'taki müzayede" - The auction THAT is in New York
Ex: "Masadaki anahtarı" - The key THAT is on the table.
I this case; what is it that can be described about the key? It's on the table.
Other Ex:
"Bahçedeki çocuk" - The child WHO is in the garden
"Evdeki köpek" - The dog THAT is in the house
"New York'taki müzayede" - The auction THAT is in New York
Maciek
Pls help, Justin.
Why in DIALOGUE "Taksim's restoran" has possesive suffix ını added while in REVIEW it has not?
Thanx
Why in DIALOGUE "Taksim's restoran" has possesive suffix ını added while in REVIEW it has not?
Thanx
Justin
Merhaba Maciek - I'm not sure where in the dialog you are seeing Taksim'in restoranı. All I see is Taksim'deki restoran. Can you describe your question in a little more detail?
Maciek
Merhaba Justin,
"Taksim’deki Hint restoranını seviyor musun? - in the DIALOGUE
"Taksim'deki restoran" - in the REVIEW
I know that no word "HINT" in the second, but it doesn't matter as we mention DEFINITE restoran in Taksim square, right?
In the dialogue "ını" added.
In the review no "ını" added. My question is why
Thanx
"Taksim’deki Hint restoranını seviyor musun? - in the DIALOGUE
"Taksim'deki restoran" - in the REVIEW
I know that no word "HINT" in the second, but it doesn't matter as we mention DEFINITE restoran in Taksim square, right?
In the dialogue "ını" added.
In the review no "ını" added. My question is why
Thanx
Maciek
In other words:
Isn't the "deki" other possessor + possessed construction (with all the sufixes necessary)?
"Taksim'in restoranı" in translation isn't the same as "Taksim'deki restoran"?
Isn't the "deki" other possessor + possessed construction (with all the sufixes necessary)?
"Taksim'in restoranı" in translation isn't the same as "Taksim'deki restoran"?
Maciek
To be more precise:
1. Definite objects
2. Possessive problem
Two different issues
1. Definite objects
2. Possessive problem
Two different issues
Justin
Ah okay, got it. Thanks.
There's actually no genitive (possessive) construction in "Taksim’deki Hint restoranını." You're seeing the compound noun construction: Hint + restoran = Hint restoranı. And then it also has the accusative at the end.
There is a bit of a difference between -deki and possessive -in. Similar to "the one in Taksim" and "Taksim's restaurant." -deki has a specific locative implication that the genitive does not. Just like in English, "Taksim'in restoranı" is kind of weird - it's hard to think of that being used in a real world sentence.
There's actually no genitive (possessive) construction in "Taksim’deki Hint restoranını." You're seeing the compound noun construction: Hint + restoran = Hint restoranı. And then it also has the accusative at the end.
There is a bit of a difference between -deki and possessive -in. Similar to "the one in Taksim" and "Taksim's restaurant." -deki has a specific locative implication that the genitive does not. Just like in English, "Taksim'in restoranı" is kind of weird - it's hard to think of that being used in a real world sentence.
Maciek
Olur. Teşekkür ederim
