Thank you ALL and sundry.

Thank you guys and guyesses,

I accept the verdict that it is a ´colloquialism´ > and every language resorts to such usages.

***But would it be, for one unfamiliar with such usage, to say instead ´görmezlikten-cesine´; entirley wrong?***

I shall ahve a look at ´Manisa´ site [an excellent resource] > but once again Colloquial Turkish lets a student down by not explaining ´peculiar´ deployment of a term which deviates from the norm.  It undermines ones one´s confidence, to say the least.

By now, memebers are liable to conclude that I have embarked on a mission to destroy ´Colloquial Turkish by Yusuf Mardin] -- not so.  It can be an excellent book if supervised by an experienced ´personal´ tutor.  As a DIY teacher, it is dismal.  Yusuf Mardin, being a native to Turkish, seems not to be able to anticipate difficulties which a foreign learner may [indeed - will] encounter.  The gifted author, sadly presumes too much and leaves many aspects ´suspended´.

´Manisa´ on the other has been constructed by a native English person [John Guise - now living in New Zealand], and one who has gone through the ´mill´ himself.  If he had written a book, it would have been potentially very good.  He, however, did the next best thing.

Thank you experts.

Tazx1

 Because we contruct words by adding suffixes to the words..

So: görmek - görmemek is there

      görür - görmez is there... there is no word in Turkish like görmemez... so, when we add the suffix, we add it to görmez:  görmezlikten gelme or görmezden gelme.

I looked in the Milet´s Ýngilizce Öðrenci Sözlüðü and it gives the definition for 

"görmemezlikten gelmek" this is wrong. should be "görmezlikten gelmek" see below. as "to pretend not to see, to cut, to ignore. You can also check on www.tureng.com and it´ll give you multiple entries for that expression.

I´m not trying to be a pain in the neck here, I just want to make sure that I learn correctly.

It makes sense to me, thank you for the explanation.

So, the official, proper way is without the "me", but, if I understand correctly, in daily use you add the "me" then? Which one seems more natural for you to use?

-ir (or -er) is aorist suffix. it becomes (-z) after a negative verb (me-z/ma-z).

gör-ür = (he) sees (verb= gör-)

gör-me-z = (he) doesn´t see (verb= görme)

it can be used to make adjectives also.

görürlük = seeing

görmezlik = not seeing

görmemez is wrong. it like saying "does not not see".

 The people who is not well educated for Turkish language (though they are native speakers) would say it.. the other person would understand it too.. but still it is wrong.

Ok, thanks  So I´d better stick to the "right" version then if I want to appear semi-educated in Turkish  

I understand the aorist tense. It´s funny how everybody says it´s wrong, yet in dictionaries it appears to be an acceptable version. Manisa Turkish calls it a "special case". All languages have exceptions, is it too much of a stretch to question whether that is not the case here?