Language |
|
|
|
|
|
yürüyerek - durarak
|
| 10. |
01 Nov 2006 Wed 03:43 pm |
|
Quote: Second thing I think -dan is added to the negative verb stem in "konuşmadan". It should be thought of as -madan instead of -ma + -dan. -ma part should be negative verb suffix -ma- because the syllable before -ma- is stressed and besides if we accept it as -ma infinitive, where does the negation come from then? I don't think -dan part makes it negative |
You are right. That should be -meden / -madan.
|
|
| 11. |
01 Nov 2006 Wed 04:34 pm |
|
But... can I use -erek / -arak with negative verbs?
|
|
| 12. |
01 Nov 2006 Wed 04:43 pm |
|
Quoting natiypuspi: But... can I use -erek / -arak with negative verbs? |
Yes, of course.
Bilmeyerek sordum.
İstemeyerek gittim.
Durmayarak devam ettim.
etc.
|
|
| 13. |
01 Nov 2006 Wed 04:55 pm |
|
|
|
| 14. |
02 Nov 2006 Thu 10:28 am |
|
Quote: Yes, of course.
Bilmeyerek sordum.
İstemeyerek gittim.
Durmayarak devam ettim.
etc.
|
"bilmeyerek" (to do something not intentionally) and "istemeyerek" (to do something only because you are pushed to do) are OK. However "durmayarak" should be "durmadan".
We can't add the suffix -erek /-arak to all the negative verb bases. For istance: We can not say "Gözlerine bakmayarak konuştu" We say "Gözlerine bakmadan konuştu" instead. One more example:
We say "Haber vermeden geldi" instead of "Haber vermeyerek geldi"
|
|
| 15. |
02 Nov 2006 Thu 10:45 am |
|
Quoting qdemir: We can't add the suffix -erek /-arak to all the negative verb bases. For istance: We can not say "Gözlerine bakmayarak konuştu" We say "Gözlerine bakmadan konuştu" instead.
|
I see no problem with "Gözlerine bakmayarak konuştu".
|
|
| 16. |
12 Dec 2006 Tue 10:34 pm |
|
-arak,-erek has a function of 'by -ing'
-meden,-madan has also the same function 'by not -ing'.
But -meden,-madan has a function of 'by not -ing before'
Yüzüme bakarak konuş.
Talk by looking at my face.
Bilgisayarı kapatmadan git.
Leave by not shutting down the PC. this is wrong
Leave by not shutting down the PC before.this is true.
|
|
| 17. |
13 Dec 2006 Wed 10:00 am |
|
Quoting Ex_tacier: -arak,-erek has a function of 'by -ing'
-meden,-madan has also the same function 'by not -ing'.
But -meden,-madan has a function of 'by not -ing before'
Yüzüme bakarak konuş.
Talk by looking at my face.
Bilgisayarı kapatmadan git.
Leave by not shutting down the PC. this is wrong
Leave by not shutting down the PC before.this is true. |
I understand that you want to give us a formulation but your example is not quite right.
"Leave without shuting down the PC" would suffice. I cannot sense a before-ness (priority) or after-ness (posteriority) in your example. For such a meaning, there should be a sequence of things (actions/occurences etc).
-meden/-meksizin = without V+ing
would be a better formulation.
Addition (correction):
Your example may have this meaning as well with a proper context:
(Bilgisayarı kapatmak üzereyim, ben) bilgisayarı kapatmadan, (sen) git
(I am about to shut down the PC, you) go, before (I) shut it down.
Maybe you mean something like that with "Leave by not shutting down the PC before", right? Nevertheless it still does mean "Leave without shuting down the PC" as well.
|
|
| 18. |
16 Dec 2006 Sat 03:35 pm |
|
Babam gelmeden odama çıkmalıyım.
|
|
| 19. |
16 Dec 2006 Sat 10:33 pm |
|
Quoting Ex_tacier: Babam gelmeden odama çıkmalıyım. |
OK. I see what you mean but it can have this meaning as well:
Babam (benimle) gelmeden odama çıkmalıyım.
I should go up to my room without my father coming with me.
And in a proper context you can omit (benimle) part.
|
|
|
