Wise and knowledgeable members

I am confused between -lenmek & -leþmek suffixes.  Please can someone explain quoting a few examples?

Are these ´Passive´ in nature, while -lenmek can be both Passive & Reflexive?

Some books indicate the ´Ãž´ bit to be indicative of a ´Cooperative Verb´ ... that only complicates the issue, for example:-

in>    Dert-leþ-mek >> to commiserate with each other -- I can sense the ´copperative bit´, but,

in>    Avrupali-laþ-mak, iyi-leþ-mek, ölmez-leþ-mek, temiz-leþ-mek >>> where is the ´cooperative bit´ ?

For a ´staircase genius´ [a dim bulb] like me ... please can someone construct sentences to highlight the meanings? 

Don´t be blinded by my use of technical terms like passive, reflexive, cooperative > these are new to me, picked up while grappling with Turkish.  My English grammar is ´zilch´, "zero", "bozuk" >> I never had to ever learn it > intuitive comprehension is what I depend upon ´lol´ [before someone gets angry - ´lol´ - I´m informed by an angel means > lots of laughter].

Tazx1

Although modern garmmar books would call -lenmek, -lesmek as suffix forms, they are in truth compound forms that have lost their original meanings by dropping of vowels. Turkish is notorious for combining two verb forms. Over the centuries, it is often the case that one of the original verb form starts dropping vowels, and assumes a new role as a suffix. A lot of grammar books would disagree and offer their usual useless explanations, which donot make any sense. This is just my interpretation of how these forms came into existence. So, take it with a grain of salt.

Take the root word GOZ, which means eye. Add to it the verb OLMAK, which gereally conveys the sense of being/doing/existing etc.

GOZ+OL+AN+MAK eventually becomes GOZLENMEK, which conveys the meaning of "being watched."

GOZ+OL+A+MAK eventually becomes GOZLEMEK, which conveys the meaning of "keeping an eye on something."

DERT (problem, sorrow etc...)

DERT+OL+AN, conveys the meaning of "something causing a problem or sorrow."

DERT+OL+AN+MAK eventually becomes DERTLENMEK, and conveys the meaning of "someone having problems, or causing himself sorror and worry."

KUVVET, which means strength and is borrowed from Arabic can take the verb OLMAK in the form of KUVVET+OL+AN+MAK, which eventually becomes KUVVETLENMEK, meaning "to gain strenght."

Try to mark how the general concept of the verb OLMAK, which denotes quite a few meaning, such as "to be, to have, to exist, to be present, etc." is being contorted into another concept.

ITMEK, to push, would take OL. IT+OL+MAK, conveying the meanings Push+To Be+Infinitive, and become ITILMEK, which would mean "being pushed."

GOR, to see, would take OL. GOR+OL+MAK, conveying the meanings See+To Be+Infinitive, and become GORULMEK, which would mean "to be seen."

SIK could carry the meanings of "dense, often, crowded, squeezed, squashed, pressed etc.."

SIK+I would refer to something that could be "tight, dense, condensed etc."

SIK+OL+MAK would eventually become SIKILMAK by taking the sense of "being bored."

The dictionary would not list these at all and would say that GOZLE means "with the eye". However, even the word ILE, which means "with", is actaully derived from the ancient OL.

GOZ+OL+A and GOZ+IL+E are siblings and form the basis of GOZLE, which eventually takes a verbal form such as GOZLEMEK, conveying the sense that "you are doing and act of eyeing with your eye."

SUS could convey the meanings of "decoration, decorating, making sonething fancy etc."

SUS+OL could convey the sense of "being part of a decoration or embroidery."

SUS+OL+A+MAK, would become SUSLEMEK, and mean "to fancy something up."

Now, let´s look at -LESMEK/-LASMAK.

Along the same lines, there are two hidden roots in these suffixes. OLMAK & EÞ. EÞ generally refers to plurality. (EÞMEK is different, it means to dig.) It could be a pair, a part, or anything that is more than one in number. EÞ could refer to your wife, or it could refer to the equivalent of something. EÞ+IM "my wife", EÞ+IT "equal"

BEKLEMEK vs BEKLEÞMEK. The EÞ of BEKLEÞMEK conveys the sense that there is a group doing the act of waiting, whereas this meaning is not inherent in BEKLEMEK.

BAKMAK vs BAKISMAK. The IÞ of BAKIÞMAK is a derivative of EÞ, and conveys the sense that the act of looking is being done by more than one person. There are two of you looking at each other.

SÝKMEK vs SÝKÝÞMEK. As vulgar as it is, SÝK means "dick, cock etc." Hence SÝKMEK becomes the act of "fucking." It does not denote plurality. It just denotes the sense that one person is doing the act of "fucking." SÝKÝÞMEK, on the other hand conveys the sense that "two people are involved in the process and are fucking each other." (Anyway, before they kick me off the board, I will move onto less vulgar examples.)

ÝTMEK "to push", ÝTÝLMEK "to be pushed", ÝTÝÞMEK "to push each other around".

GORMEK "to see, look at", GORULMEK "to be seen", GORUÞMEK "to see each other or to be in touch."

SIKMAK vs SIKIÞMAK. SIKMAK would be to bore someone or to squeeze something. SIKIÞMAK would convey the sense of being squeezed like you are in a can of sardines or a crowded bus. It could also mean you are in despair and need to run to the toilet. Cok sýkýþtim tuvalete gitmeme lazim would mean you gotta go to the loo.

However, as always, there are irregularities. For example KONUÞMAK also contains the EÞ root and indicates that more than one are involved in the act of talking, but KONMAK, which means "to land" as in KUÞ DALA KONDU (the bird on a branch) has nothing to do with KONUÞMAK. Along the same liines, COK SIKILDIM (I am really bored), and COK SIKIÞTIM betray the rule as well. I have to say that there are irregularities. SOmetimes the forms pertain to the active/passive, and other times they become somewhat reflexive or plural. There is, for example no TANMAK, but there is TANIÞMAK, meaning "to become acquianted." There is no TOKAMAK but there is TOKALAÞMAK, meaning "to shake hands."

cynicmystic

Thank you for your elaborate ... and comprehensible explanation.  What´s keeping you from turning into a professional >> how thoughtless of me to speculate!  You may already be one!!!!

My one response will be to inform that I love Turkish and its ability to ´metamorph´.  There is much logic in its syntax, and things become plain ... if someone can de-construct the mysteries [few and far between though they may be].

Þimdi çok mutluyum.

tazx1

Oh no, I am no professional, and do not actually know much about the grammar. I am more of the instinctive type that looks into word histories and roots. Then, I try to draw conclusions. Any lanugage that you may study is often filled with irregularities that textbooks are unable to explain. It is often the case that these irregularities stem from ancient sound shifts and and word formations.

If you like Turkish for its agglutinative nature, I suggest you give Finnish a try. It is a fascinating tongue with lots of tongue twisters. It is also similar to Turkish in certain ways.