What is this structure and what does it exactly mean?

Zamanı olupta bana yardım edebilecekler lütfen bana yazsın.

Yollarıma bakıpta hep boynunu bükmüşsün.

 - The first one is pretty straightforward, you can translate it as,

Those who have the time and feel they can be of help (to me) please write to me.

 - The second one is slightly more complicated. You have to understand two idioms, before you can understand it.

Idiom 1 : Yollara bakmak ... to look at one´s roads ... means waiting someone´s return with great enthusiasm

Idiom 2 : Boyun bükmek...to drop your head....dropping your head down (as opposed to keeping it up) is an expression of sadness in Turkish culture.

Putting all together your sentence would translate to,

(I hear) you constantly waited for my return and were extremely sad.

Ok, thank you, AlphaF, but what does the locative ending actually bring to the meaning? Wouldn´t it be the same if it was just olup, bakıp?

I do not have an answer to that questıon. To me, BAKIP and BAKIPTA can be interchanceably used, with no significant difference in meaning.

I think -da there is not locative. It must be seperate.

There may be a misspelling in the latter sentence, but the former with olupta I am sure about because tunci wrote it (or corrected it into this form) a couple of days ago.

In my opinion it must be seperate. I think -da is a conjuction there.

Look at how AlphaF translated it and how he/she used "and" to connect actions.

Ok, as you are so smart what do you say about this verse:

Dünyanın en tuhaf mahlukusun yani, hani şu derya içre olup deryayı bilmiyen balıktan da tuhaf. (Nazım Hikmet) 

Isn´t it strange that there is no da after olup here? Doesn´t it look like the negation in bilmiyen concerns olup also?

Dear abla ol-up is an adverb there. And there is no rule that you must use -da after -up.

Ex: Bağırıp beni rahatsız etme.

You mean I invented the rule myself?

I made a correction ol-up is an adverb. And you can use -da after it. But it is not a rule. But if you use it you can only use it as a conjuction.

maybe tunci can help us.

I had this understanding the -Ip form takes all its grammatical markers from the predicate verb (including negation) if the conjunction de is not put between them to prevent it. But it seems now it is not such a strict rule.

gokuyum, thanks.

Give an example please. I dont understand what you mean.

Zengo´yu görüp de korkmamak imkansızdı.

> görmek ve korkmamak

Zengo´yu görüp korkmamak imkansızdı.

> görmemek ve korkmamak

Lewis´s grammar says this.

He says wrong. -de is a conjuction but it also powers the meaning of action. There is no real difference between those sentences.

It was impossible not to be afraid when you saw Zengo.

So good I asked. I was so certain about this.

Lets wait and see what the others say about this matter.

Honestly, I was in a dilemma on locating "da" on that particular sentence when I corrected that statement recently however when I checked smilar usage in a "trusted newspaper" I saw it "one word [attached onto verb -Ipta] " and gone for it. But when Abla brought this issue up to discussion I had a chance to review it and Gokuyum´s digging into it helped me to rethink about it. And now I am inclining into "seperate dA ".

* Another thing ; Although sometimes conjunction "de" is pronounced as "te" [verbally]  whereas in written language it has to be seperated.

* But Locative "de" can not be seperated in both written and verbal language.

* The best way to check " dA " whether it should be written seperately or one word is ;

If the meaning of the word is almost the same when you remove "dA" from the word , then it is conjunction.

Zamanı olupta bana yardım edebilecekler lütfen bana yazsın.

Zamanı olup bana yardım edebilecekler lütfen bana yazsın.

I dont see much difference between two statements.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Under the light of all these,  the function of "da" in our sentence the clitic "de" follows "Ip" and it denotes and emphasize the relation between the actions.

1.Condition --> One must have time

2.Condition --> One must be capable [able to] help me.

3. wish [demand] --> I wish someone write to me

---------------------------------------------------------------------

If we put them all together ;

I wish someone, who is [at the position of ] able to help me providing that having enough time [to help me] , write [contact] to me please.

So my final conclusion on function of "da" in this context is "providing that"

We all make mistakes. It is very normal. I wrote adjective for "olup" but then understood that it was impossible for "olup" to be an adjective in any position in the sentence. Then I corrected it. I learnt many things from my mistakes. And I hope I will go on making mistakes again and again and someone will correct them and show me what I do wrong. Peace.

when I look at it from different angle I see "da" as  "and also ",

I wish someone, who is [at the position of ] able to help me and also having enough time [to help me] , write [contact] to me please.

I know, I messed the sentence up in English point of view  may be a native English speaker can tidy it up.

tunci´s sentence was not the first place where I saw this structure. I remember I have been wondering before what it is and how come it is not introduced in grammars. But this time my copy-paste finger worked very fast and I caught it before the ink dried. Good.

Thank you, gokuyum and tunci. It´s a joy to see how you two cooperate.

You are a wise man Gökuyum.

You too my friend.

Perfect harmony.

Without "da", YOLLARIMA BAKIP HEP BOYNUNU BÜKMÜŞSÜN, the implication is that the speaker has first hand knowledge of the other party waitıng for his return (That he has physically and personally observed the other party waiting for his return).

With "da", YOLLARIMA BAKIPDA HEP BOYNUNU BÜKMÜŞSÜN, the implication is that the speaker´s knowledge of the other party waiting for his return is based on what others (3rd parties) told him, not on personal observation.

Hope this helps.

Thanks, AlphaF. The use of these small conjunctions is really difficult to understand for a learner. Imitating native use is even more difficult. Half of the things I thought I knew even turned out wrong. de/da would be worth a thread of its own.

I wish someone who is able to help, and has enough time, would write to me.

I request someone who is able to help, and has enough time, to write to me.

Depends on the context of if "wish" is a request or if its just hopeful thinking. Would this change it in Turkish though?

Thanks for tidying "my all over the place " sentence Mavili. It is actually a request, in other words it is bit softened imperative [command form of a verb] form by adding "lütfen" ......... "yazsın "

So "request" is more appropriate for the sentence.

Well,

I don´t see any difference here. Another thing is that -miş suffix is used for hear and say or learned/noticed things. How can it be a first hand knowledge with its involvement?

Here´s another example:

gidip gelmemek var = there is (as a possibility) no coming back after going (somewhere)

gidip de gelmemek var = there is (as one of the possibilities) no coming back after going (somewhere)

I agree,

Generally "mIş" is used for referring the reported speechs, events., hearing things and being told things.

Imagine an old man called "Uncle Ali ", he goes back to his village where he was born and spent his childhood, after long years. He stands in front of the derelict house where he was born and says to a villager,

- I was born in this house [sighing in a longing voice " Ah "]

The villager comes to me and reports what uncle Ali said to him. And one day I report this to another friend of mine saying ;

Ali Amca doğduğu eve gidip derin bir ah çekmiş --> I was told that Uncle Ali went to the very house where he was born and he said a deep "Oh !" [oh! those were the days!]

------------------------------------------------------------------------

now if we add "de" it wont make a difference in the meaning. [in this particular case by putting "de" the action "went" is stressed ]

Ali Amca doğduğu eve gidip de derin bir ah çekmiş

There are two events here

1. yollara bakmak

2. boyun bükmek

that speaker´s knowledge of the second event depends on hearsay is obvious. Our discussion here relates to the first event.

Anyone wish to offer an alternative explanation to the function of "da" ın the first part ?

Needless to say I hardly understand. It never stopped me from commenting.

I guess the question now is whether de/da in the sentence changes the juxtaposition of the verb with -Ip and the predicate, so to say the target area of the grammatical material of the latter. In other words

I understand tunci answered it with another example:

´I was told both the first and the second event´, i.e. He says -miş affects them both.

It reminds me of the talk we had about negation with gokuyum earlier in this very thread.

Talking about negation, I can´t quite catch this difference:

si++, could you just d-r-a-w it for me?

There is one event but two actions. As it is a compound verb two actions combined with 1.[hidden "ve" in the first sentence "ıp"] and conjunction "da" in the second sentence. However in the second sentence "da" is stressing and the "adverb". [ Nasıl boynunu bükmüssün ? Yollarıma bakarak ]

1. Yollarıma bakmışsın ve hep boynunu bükmüşsün.

2. Yollarıma bakarak [bakıp da] hep boynunu bükmüşsün. [but subordinate clause is obeying the main clause in Tense wise which is reported tense "miş" [both actions are performed at the same time]

Tunci bakıp is already an adverb. - da doesnt make it an adverb. It connects it with the rest of the sentence and it also stresses it.

You are right Gokuyum. Why did I say that way I dont know It is stresses the first action and conjoins two clauses.

It is normal. Dont worry. Sometimes our brain sees things very differently. 

May be too much grammar decreasing the oxygen level in my brain. Abla I blame you for that [Şaka şaka]

Well,

da/de means too, as well. So far so good.

When you make use of it after v+ip, what you mean by that is what you mean with the one without "da/de" is another possibility (among others) for something (you need a context to know the other possibilities/options).

Hmmm...

You mean something like gidip bir daha gelmemek ihtimali de var  -  ´yes it is an option among other options´. Kind of picking up one of the possibilities.

Well,

That´s fine but I think I have a better explaination now.

Most of the times, there is no difference in meaning as pointed out by gokuyum with/without "da"/"de".

x-ip y = doing x and y

x-ip de y = doing x and then y or doing y after x

gidip geldim = I went (there) and came (back)

gidip de geldim = I went (there) and then came (back); I came (back) after going (there)

And also; the title is wrong. It´s not -ip + locative case suffix but "da"/"de" which is written separately.

Yes, it turned out wrong. But I had some doubts while typing it, that´s why I added the question mark.

V1-ip V2 is a very tight package I see. The V´s are almost seen as one action. de/da in the middle may bring a slight breeze of air between them.