Language |
|
|
|
|
|
Use of sağol
|
| 10. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 01:25 am |
|
Quoting Teanga: so in that case I say "sağ ol", as he has gone out of his way to do something that he didn't really need to do. |
I note you always write "sağ ol" and not "sağol"
Why?
Quoting Teanga: It's a term that shouldn't be overused though. Teşekkür ederim/Teşekkürler suffices for most situations. |
Teşekkürler!
That explanation helps alot 
|
|
| 11. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 01:47 am |
|
Quoting bod: Quoting Teanga: so in that case I say "sağ ol", as he has gone out of his way to do something that he didn't really need to do. |
I note you always write "sağ ol" and not "sağol"
Why?
Quoting Teanga: It's a term that shouldn't be overused though. Teşekkür ederim/Teşekkürler suffices for most situations. |
Teşekkürler!
That explanation helps alot |
Sağ ol is the gramatically correct form. Ol is olmak in the imperative mood and sağ is the noun that it affects. Though it is also commonly spelt as one word sağol. It is the same as hoşÃ§a kal, which is meant to be spelt as I have spelt it, but a lot of people also spell it "hoşÃ§akal".
|
|
| 12. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 01:59 am |
|
Quoting Teanga: Sağ ol is the gramatically correct form. Ol is olmak in the imperative mood and sağ is the noun that it affects. Though it is also commonly spelt as one word sağol. It is the same as hoşÃ§a kal, which is meant to be spelt as I have spelt it, but a lot of people also spell it "hoşÃ§akal". |
Why is this???
Is it a dilution of the language, a lazy street form or an evolution of the language as a whole?
|
|
| 13. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 02:03 am |
|
Quoting bod: Quoting Teanga: Sağ ol is the gramatically correct form. Ol is olmak in the imperative mood and sağ is the noun that it affects. Though it is also commonly spelt as one word sağol. It is the same as hoşÃ§a kal, which is meant to be spelt as I have spelt it, but a lot of people also spell it "hoşÃ§akal". |
Why is this???
Is it a dilution of the language, a lazy street form or an evolution of the language as a whole? |
It probably evolved that way over time. There are numerous english words that used to be two words instead of one.
Also, when you say "sağ ol" it sounds like you're saying one word, due to the yumuşak g lengthening the preceding vowel and making it seem like it merges with the following vowel (o) in ol. That probably made people spell it as one word as well.
|
|
| 14. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 02:14 am |
|
Is there a singular definitive source for what is true Türkçe??? I mean like the Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of English (at least UK English!)
Not to mean that OED language is universal or even common in daily life - but at least it is an aknowledged common ground for everyone.
|
|
| 15. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 02:31 am |
|
Quoting bod: Is there a singular definitive source for what is true Türkçe??? I mean like the Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of English (at least UK English!)
Not to mean that OED language is universal or even common in daily life - but at least it is an aknowledged common ground for everyone. |
Same in Turkish, dictionaries. All the dictionaries I have state it as being "Sağ ol". Besides, even the "Türk Dil Kurumu" tend to get things wrong, in some peoples' opinions.
|
|
| 16. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 02:37 am |
|
Quoting Teanga: Quoting bod: Is there a singular definitive source for what is true Türkçe??? I mean like the Oxford English Dictionary is the definitive source of English (at least UK English!)
Not to mean that OED language is universal or even common in daily life - but at least it is an aknowledged common ground for everyone. |
Same in Turkish, dictionaries. All the dictionaries I have state it as being "Sağ ol". Besides, even the "Türk Dil Kurumu" tend to get things wrong, in some peoples' opinions.
|
The only two Türkçe dictionaries I use state "sağol" and not "sağ ol" - but there again they are both online!!!
http://www.turkishdictionary.net/
http://www.seslisozluk.com/
Having said that - I have 8 English dictionaries, but only one would I consider definitive!
|
|
| 17. |
05 Jan 2006 Thu 12:18 pm |
|
Teanga Sağ ol is the gramatically correct form. Ol is olmak in the imperative mood and sağ is the noun that it affects. Though it is also commonly spelt as one word sağol. It is the same as hoşÃ§a kal, which is meant to be spelt as I have spelt it, but a lot of people also spell it "hoşÃ§akal".
I found your explanatıon of the orıgıns of the hoşÃ§akal and sağol spellings illuminatıng. Teşekkürler!
|
|
| 18. |
09 Jan 2006 Mon 04:53 am |
|
Quoting Teanga: Sağ ol is used in most cases where somebody goes out of their way to do something for you, or do something for you that isn't in their job description etc.
I wouldn't say it's a particularly manly thing to say. It can be used for both men and women.
It's better to say sağ ol to someone than teşekkür ederim if they have gone out of their way to help you, it's just more polite. |
This was a good explanaition. The day I wrote here I found myself saying sağol to a lady and was surprised. So I have changed my mind on this issue. I think though sağol is more informal than teşekkür ederim it is not a mannish thing and could be used by females or when speaking to females but of course sağolun would be more formal than sağol.
I also like the explaniation above using sağol when somebody is going out of the routine and does something which is not a part of his/her job.
In written language I prefer hoşÃ§akal and sağol as one word.
"HoşÃ§a vakit geçirin" is a proper sentence where hoşÃ§a means in "a funny way", "in a nice way". Even though not so common we use hoşÃ§a in that sense. "HoşÃ§a kal" in this case would imply the meaning "be nice", "stay nice" but in reality it doesnt have that meaning.
When soebody says hoşÃ§akal you can not respond as "Olur.denerim.", "I will try".
OK, even the kids know what "hoşÃ§a" means and what kal ( kalmak ) means but is it really neccessary to point to their meaining when hoşÃ§akal has only one meaning in practice which is "good bye".
About sağol I think it has gone too far to be considered the same thing as "sağ ol". When written seperatedly it means "be health" or "be alive" and is too far away of the meaning "thank you".
"Atatürk sağ olsaydı bunlar olmazdı."
If Atatürk had been alive these wouldnt happen.
"Sağ olmak" indeed means "being alive" and has no close relation anymore with "sağol" (thank you).
If they continue this way I'm afraid one day they will say we sould write günaydın (good morning) as "gün aydın" (the day is bright).
Of course old people like to stress morphological details of words and they belive this makes them look more intellectual. Maybe the is too crowded with these kind people. Maybe if I had said "sağ ol" to somebody from TDK he would respond me as "hepimiz sağ olalım" (let us all be alive/healty). Do we really need such an unatractive cleverness?
|
|
|
