Is it true that some verbs don´t have causative forms like it says in this list:

                         http://www.turkishlanguage.co.uk/sinsylverblist.htm ?

Among them are such ordinary verb stems like kal-, kalk-, kat-, kaz-, san- plus others. This surprises me because it´s easy to imagine uses for their causatives. It´s also difficult to understand why some have and some don´t.

I don´t see any problem with their causatives (note the following). Strange.

Kalk-mak already has its causative:

kalk-ıt-mak

I would also understand kalktırmak but kaldırmak have different meaning so there may a problem in parsing it as causative of kalmak.

Yes it was kaldırmak that made me wonder and check. I was about to use it as ´make someone stay´ but I noticed that the verb was busy.

I think if certain verbs lacked otherwise productive forms from their paradigm there should be a very obvious reason for it, semantic or phonetic preferably. And this reason should be seen very easily. (Otherwise native speakers would forget the rule and it would be too bad.) That´s why it didn´t make sense.

si++  -  thanks.

Also note the following:

getirmek (mutated from geldirmek of gelmek)

götürmek (mutated from gittirmek of gitmek)

Just out out curiosity I began to think what might the reason for the labialization of the vowels here. There is not even b/p or m in the word. Took a look at Nişanyan Sözlük which you have shown me before. It seems to me that götürmek comes from another ATü root *kö- meaning something like ´kalkmak´. But maybe I can´t read it right.

Maybe:

götürmek < gittürmek

I am not sure about *kö-

geldirmek

gittirmek

seems more reasonable to me. But I don´t have evidence. I will investigate.

This might be useful info ;

Lexical causativitity can be seen in two groups ;

1. The verbs that come from different roots and origin of their causitive forms are unknown [unclear] . I mean these kind of verbs rejects to take causitive markings instead their causitivity are met by different verb.

gir --> sok

Ali içeri girdi --> Ali entered in

Ali [kardeşini] içeri soktu --> Ali made his brother enter in.

gel --> getir

Partiye gel -> Come to the party

Onu partiye getir ---> Make him [bring him] to the party

git ---> gönder

gör---> göster

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Verbs that causitivity forms are formed by mutation.

k > dır

kalk > kaldır [it also has another meaning "to remove, to lift up]

---    -----

get up ---> make him get up

kaldırt --> get someone to get somone get up. [increased causitivity by adding "t" ]

********

n > k

yan > yak

********

ul > ar

kurtul > kurtar

to get saved > to make someone to get saved [to save]

********

n > t

aldan > aldat

to deceive > to make someone deceived [to cheat]

ıslan > ıslat

to get wet > to get someone get wet

********

We have some other examples of -n- plus -t- with the unused original verb stem:

inci-n-mek, inci-t-mek

ısı-n-mak, ısı-t-mak

av-un-mak, av-ut-mak

arı-n-mak, arı-t-mak

also -l- plus -t-:

dağ-ıl-mak, dağ-ıt-mak

Thank you for your efforts, si++, tunci.

...and as a result kal- was left without its natural causative form. It shows here how it happened (http://www.nisanyansozluk.com/?k=kald%C4%B1rmak):

The -dır- part of kaldırmak consists of two different old derivation suffixes. It´s just bad luck that no room was left for causativizing kal-.

I love etymologies. They make me feel that everything in this world can be explained.

They look to me like reflexives and causatives of long lost verb stems.