Language |
|
|
|
-abil? -abilir?
|
20. |
31 Jan 2010 Sun 02:28 pm |
Well, I have always thought that Turkish is an easy-to-learn language, logical, consistent so few exceptions compared to any other language. Anyway that´s just my tought. Never mind.
Then how would you assess English based on your this statement of Turkish being "over-complicated"? Even more "over-complicated" than Turkish or less? Please be specific with your claim.
Do you think that Turkish is not complicated?
|
|
21. |
31 Jan 2010 Sun 02:34 pm |
Perhaps I meant ´conflicting´. What´s your answer to my point about the negative?
I thought I explained it. Well; let me explain one more time for you.
When you say "Ahmet sınavı geçebilirdi ama çalışmadı", a Turkish-native speaker understands it as;
Ahmet was actually able to pass the exam; but he couldn´t because he didn´t study:
Ahmet aslında sınavı geçebilecek durumdaydı; ama geçemedi çünkü çalışmadı.
We call "yapıda olumlu, anlamda olumsuz cümleler" like these structures. That means: sentences that are positive with structure, negative with meaning".
You got it now? I tried to explain about the meaning.
Ahmet sınavı geçemedi çünkü çalışmadı: Ahmet couldn´t have passed the exam because he didn´t study.
Ahmet sınavı geçebilirdi ama çalışmadı: Ahmet was able to pass the exam, but he didn´t study, so he couldn´t pass it.
thx
turkishcobra//
Edited (1/31/2010) by turkishcobra
|
|
22. |
31 Jan 2010 Sun 02:40 pm |
Do you think that Turkish is not complicated?
If only there was a way to measure it. I think that it´s an easy-to-learn language compared to other languages. There are some research to support my thought. For example studies showed that Turkish babies are the fastest language learners.
I have read the following in a language forum. In a way it supports both of us.
Turkish is my major foreign language, and I´ve been using it off and on for many years now, including a number of years living in Turkey. I think of it as "an easy language that´s hard to learn", in other words, there are many things that make it MUCH easier than many other languages people study: no sounds that are difficult to pronounce, a simple and very phonetic Latin-based alphabet, no gender differences for nouns (except for a masculine/feminine distinction in a few words borrowed from languages like Arabic) or even pronouns, essentially no irregular verbs, etc. (This extreme regularity of Turkish, once you become accustomed to it, can even spoil you a bit in terms of other languages, which then seem very "quirky" with all their genders, irregular forms, declined adjectives, etc.)
On the other hand, very little of the vocabulary of Turkish is cognate with words from Western languages, and the morphology and syntax, especially as one gets into the longer sentences that mark most formal writing, are an entire other dimension. I think of Turkish sentence structure as a sort of mental gymnastics, which is fun to play with but takes most speakers of Indo-European languages quite a long time to become halfway familiar with, let alone to master. Even people who´ve studied the language for quite some time can get irretrievably lost in some long sentences. Simply put, "the way Turkish works", while quite regular and in fact logical, is totally alien to the way we think and speak in languages like English, and getting used to this difference is a big job that takes a lot of time and effort. As in so much in language-learning, strong and consistent motivation is essential, and you need to put in effort over time to achieve mastery.
In terms of comparison with other Middle Eastern languages, like Arabic or Persian, Turkish is probably the easiest at the beginning, but gets a bit harder, I think, as one progresses. It´s also not as rich in terms of literature or as important culturally as Arabic or Persian. On the other hand, Turkey is arguably the most socially and economically advanced Muslim country, and a knowledge of Turkish also helps one to learn the other Turkic languages spoken in Central Asia, so a good knowledge of Turkish can open the door to a lot of culturally and linguistically rewarding explorations.
|
|
23. |
31 Jan 2010 Sun 02:56 pm |
I thought I explained it. Well; let me explain one more time for you.
When you say "Ahmet sınavı geçebilirdi ama çalışmadı", a Turkish-native speaker understands it as;
Ahmet was actually able to pass the exam; but he couldn´t because he didn´t study:
Ahmet aslında sınavı geçebilecek durumdaydı; ama geçemedi çünkü çalışmadı.
We call "yapıda olumlu, anlamda olumsuz cümleler" like these structures. That means: sentences that are positive with structure, negative with meaning".
You got it now? I tried to explain about the meaning.
Ahmet sınavı geçemedi çünkü çalışmadı: Ahmet couldn´t have passed the exam because he didn´t study.
Ahmet sınavı geçebilirdi ama çalışmadı: Ahmet was able to pass the exam, but he didn´t study, so he couldn´t pass it.
thx
turkishcobra//
OK - but your English translation of the sentence - however correct it is in Turkish - is not correct. We are always being told to ´think Turkish rather than English´ when trying to translate from English to Turkish - but we must ´think English when translating from Turkish to English. What you were saying in your original post is undoubtedly correct for the Turkish but not for the English translation. (I notice that you substituted ´çünkü´ for ´ama´ in your example above - which actually now DOES make sense in English.
|
|
24. |
01 Feb 2010 Mon 03:09 pm |
.
Edited (9/2/2010) by turkaturk
|
|
25. |
01 Feb 2010 Mon 03:15 pm |
This was my personal idea as well...
thx
turkishcobra //
|
|
26. |
01 Feb 2010 Mon 08:11 pm |
It´s true that you cannot measure it. Lots of popular words like perfect or imperfect aren´t based on facts. So let´s let everybody to decide what they consider hard or easy.
On the other hand, you can find studies and researches about everything on the net. If I were you, I would be more careful using them. Don´t forget, they used the think that the Earth is flat. Some still do: http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/flaterth.htm 
I was talking about something more serious. See for example:
http://cnl.psych.cornell.edu/papers/LandC-cogsci2002.pdf
|
|
27. |
03 Feb 2010 Wed 03:02 am |
I find distinguishing between the two forms, -abildi, & -abilirdi confusing!! Please help.
For example
>"Ahmet could have seen the accident, but he came five minutes after."<
My translation: "Ahmet kazayi görebildi, fakat beş dakika sonra geldi"
Book: "Ahmet kazayi görebilirdi, fakat beş dakika sonra geldi"
Is the use of the aorist past tense necessary? Or is my translation acceptable? .... especially when talking about something which happened in the ´Simple Past´ ...!!!
My recollection is that aorist tense is used to denote something which happens regularly ..!! Does it imply that Ahmet was in the habit of arriving few minutes late after the accident?
Is there a ´rule´ ???
Thanks, kindly.
Tazx1
Here is the information you are looking for:
-abil- (lit. know how to) =can; be able to
-abilirdi refers to ability or capacity in past time:
Ninem Rusça konuşabilirdi - My grandmother could speak Russian
We often use - abilir in a question to ask somebody to do something.The use of -abilir in this way is fairly polite (formal):
Lütfen, bana bir katalog gönderebilir misiniz? - Could you send me a catalogue, please?
-abilirdi is used in conditional sentences:
Yeterli zamanım olsa bunu yapabilirdim - I could do this,if I had enough time
Dün denemiş olsaydın bu kutuyu kaldırabilir miydin - could you have lifted that box, if you had tried yesterday?
Note that - abilirdi is not used except in conditions, for an isolated achievement in past time. Instead, -abildi- is preferred:
tekne alabora olduğunda, kıyıya kadar yüzebildiler - when the boat upset, they were able to swim to the bank.
(not kıyıya kadar yüzebilirdiler which is incorrect).
Dün nehire bir adam düştü. Polis onu kurtarabildi. A man fell into the river yesterday. The police were able to save him.
(not onu kurtarabilirdi which is incorrect)
I hope it helps 
Edited (2/3/2010) by upsy_daisy
|
|
|