I am still struggling with the useage of  ´-se´ (conditional) ... in verious contexts.  I can guess what it might mean, but there is always an irritating, residual doubt.

Please can someone, kindly, translate the following as accurately as possible so I try and decypher the usage of ´-se´ >

as in ´olmasa´ & ´görmese´

>Keþke bu cep feneri olmasa idi, bu þyleri görmese idim<  [from a story in old Turkish]

[I think in modern Turkish it would be ´olmasaydi´ & ´görmeseydim´]

>>>I expected it to read > Keþke bu cep feneri olmasaydi, bu þeyleri görmedim<<< {two conditinals make it vague} ...

Thanks in anticipation.

Tazx1

I think this question would be best answered by a native speaker or an experienced learner, but I just wanted to post what I think and see if I´m on the right track here.

So this is how I understand it. When you use "keþke" and then use the third conditional, I think it expresses an unfulfilled wish or regret, so the first part of the sentence would translate (I think) as "If only this flashlight wasn´t there" or "I wish this flashlight wasn´t there" or "If it wasn´t for this flashlight" or something along those lines. Now the 2nd part I would think you´d put in the aorist tense "bu þeyleri görürmedim" - "I wouldn´t see these things". I think that if it is also in third conditional, then it expresses, again, unfulfilled wish/condition. I´m thinking the second part translates as "I wouldn´t have seen these things".

So I would translate this as "If only this flashlight wasn´t there, I wouldn´t have seen these things".

I´m also thinking, that maybe, the "keþke" applies to both parts and it could be translated as "If only this flashlight wasn´t there, If only I wouldn´t have seen this thing" - but not sure about that one.

I could be totally off track here, so do wait for a native speaker/experienced learner to correct, the above is just my musings on the topic.

Thank you Melek74, you have indicated exactly what I understood.  Your additional conjecture that ´Keske´ may apply to both clauses of the esntence is very intelligent thought.

It fits very neatly into the context, ´Iwish that flashlight wasn´t there, (and) I wish I didn´t see these things´.

I will keep an eye out and watch what someone else has to say.

Well done. 

Tazx1 

yes actually that´s true; keþke here applies to both.

Awesome, and Dilliduduk confirmed it too (thanks Dilliduduk! ), so maybe there´s hope for us yet .

That story sounds intriguing too , I´m curious what things s/he saw with that flashlight.

Would you mind sharing the name/author of the story? Is it available online? In print?

Thanks.

Angel74

I substituted the word ´Ã¾eyler´ for what actually was in the text.  The text is from a little booklet I found abandoned at Antalya [Turkey] airport.

Tazx1  

 He he, now I´m even more curious . Come on Taz, what did he see with the flashlight?

Angel, I can assure you that whatever there is ... it niether tickling, nor intreguing, nor remotely remotely of intimate nature.

To set you at peace ... it is a story with a ´moral´ at the end.  The writer is describing how our senses can be deceived  if our vision is limited >> like trying to discover [determine] what is inside a vast and a very dark cavern [so to speak] ... with a tiny torch.  We can be horribly mislead by what we ´appear´ to see ... eventually it leads to frustration.

To relate the whole story, I´ll have to scan its tattered pages, one by one, and then forward it to you.

Remember, ´curiosty kills the cat´ ... just now you are at least enjoying what might be ´there´ >> ´cat´ being the suspense ... enjoy the anticipation and suspense ... don´t kill it.

Sonunda oyle de bir moral dir, anladin mi? [´lol´]

Tazx1

 there are two conditionals independant from each other (in this case they are cause-result, but it does not need to be)

"Keþke" as indicated "if only"

"If only I did not have this torch, (and) if only I did not see them."

 I didn´t see this post. Yes, that´s exactly how you said.