When a noun is used to describe another noun, the latter takes the '(s)i' suffix to show the relationship between the two nouns:
Examples:
araba anahtarı - car key
mutfak döşemesi - kitchen floor
yatak odası - bedroom

But if the first 'noun' is actually a verbal noun, is the '(s)i' suffix still added to the second noun???
Examples:
gülme polisi - laughing policeman
uçma domuzı - flying pig
konuşma gemisi - talking ship

Thank you Erdinç - another 'lump' of Türkçe has just dropped into place I think

One thing that was not clear to me from your explanations is how '-dik' changes to '-diği'. I have worked it out although it has taken me nearly an hour so I am going to explain it for the sake of other learners and also so others can check that my understanding is actually correct!

There are essentially two types of participles - 'standard' (I'm sure they have a name!!!) and personal. 'Standard' participles do not take a person suffix whereas personal participles do.

'Standard' Participles:
-miş (Past Participle)
-r (Aorist Participle)
-en (Present Participle)
-ecek (Future Participle)

Personal Participles:
-dik (Present Personal Participle)
-ecek (Future Personal Participle)

All personal participates take a personal suffix:
-im , in , i , imiz , iniz , leri
So -dik always takes a personal suffix and if it is 3rd person singular 'i' then it becomes -diği

Is that about right???
Is there a past and/or aorist personal participle???

Hi bod,
your explanation is almost correct. As you said the -dik suffix takes the possessive suffixes as personal suffix. This is true for both verbal adjectives and for verbal adverbs that can be build with the -dik suffix.

Yes, as Elisa mentioned the k becomes ğ when a suffix starting with a vowel is attached to it. Notice that the their person plural possessive suffix doesnt start with a vowel. So -dik remains with the 'k'.

"Geldikleri zaman" bana haber ver. (verbal adverb clause)
"Geldikleri gibi" giderler. (verbal adverb clause)
"Yaptıkları hatalar" unutuldu. (verbal adjective phrase)
"Yaşadıkları ev" şimdi müze oldu. (verbal adjective phrase)

Most verbs don't take the -dik suffix without personal suffixes. There are only a few that do.

Example:
bildik görüntüler : known pictures
tanıdık biri : a known person

But with the negative and passive mood the -dik suffix without personal suffixes is more common:

Example:
"Gidilmedik yer, görülmedik güzellik, bilinmedik sır, okunmadık kitap ve çözülmedik gizem bırakmadılar."
They havent left an unvisited place, an unseen beauty, an unknown secret, an unread book and an unsolved mystery.


Try winmekmak with, Participle (dik) + negative + passive

This is an excellent point bod. There is theory that says men can learn a foreign language like a baby learns to speak.
In fact the theory grows stronger with time and could become more popular in the future. Kids for instance learn a foreign language easier. I think it is because they do less thinking about the foreign language from the perspective of their native language.

I think we need to stop thinking in our native langauge to make it easier to learn the foreign language. There are a few ways of thinking and some of them are impossible without words.

Analytic thinking requires the use of language. Therefore analytic thinking isn't the best way to learn a language. Analytic thinking is a scientific approach to topics which is common for adults while not so common for kids. Of coures it is very good to learn the rules but will hold back learning the language itself.

There is another way of thinking which is to grasp. We can grasp concepts without them being defined with words. For instance as I type now I don't think with Turkish. I have the ideas in mind and then search for English words to express my ideas. I recently looked at my essay "Istanbul my Love" and realised that it would have been difficult for me to translate it into Turkish, which has a different soul. For me the soul of Turkish is richer than English as I havent had too much experience with words. They still look a bit foreign to me.

The more experience you have with foreign words, the easier you will remember them. This experience doesnt have to be speaking or wiriting but it can be also listening and reading provided that you are not translating the text but are trying to grasp the words without thinking on them with your native language (without thinking on them analytically).
To grasp is something more intuitional. The sourrounding meanings (the secondary meanings) of a word can help as they will support the intuition.

In summary, about foreign languages I would say:
"Don't think, just accept it."

I have a theory that I havent mentioned in too many places yet. It hasn't been tested yet at all and it sounds a little silly. I think it is possible to learn a language with a single cinema film provided that the movie has speech in it in an average level and you have the patience to watch the movie as many times as needed. Of coures you need to do some dictionary work but it would be much better if you don't do any dictionary work for a month.
I would like to test my theory myself but I can't find a good French film.