I often refer to the grammar book by Geoffrey Lewis because everything is in there somewhere. I also agree that his examples are often outdated and so convoluted that even in English it can be nearly impossible to understand. However, on this matter of -ip de, I think he is correct. A second source agrees with him, and even goes further. The source is:
Turkish - A Comprehensive Grammar by Aslı Göksel and Celia Kerslake published by Routledge in 2005: ISBN 0-415-11494-2 in paperback. I am referring to pages 510 and 511 without their permission. I hope they understand.
For me, this book is very difficult to learn from because, as Lewis said, those who teach grammar try too hard to force the same rules and structures on both languages. I think it was Abla who replied to one of my threads saying , basically, one should just read it, accept it, and get on with it. On the other hand, I have been so persistent on this subject because misunderstanding a yes/no can be very serious.
Several situations are discussed in this book:
----------------------------------------------
(1) -ip and -arak are a regular means of conjoining semantically equal clauses with respect to tense/aspect/modality. These suffixes replace all tense/aspect/modality and all other suffixes following them. This is the simplist case:
Sinemaya gidip güzel bir film seyretsek.
We should go to the cinema and watch a good film.
Başbakan İzmir´e giderek bazı işadamlarıyla görüştü.
The Prime Minister went to Izmir and met some businessmen.
----------------------------------------------
(2) Although it is rather unusual, some speakers use -ip when conjoining clauses with different subjects, especially when they both have 3rd person subjects:
Tam o saatte Semra işi bırakıp Ahmet işbaşı yapıyor.
At exactly that time, Semra leaves work and Amet goes on duty.
I wouldn´t bother myself with this one. A rare usage.
----------------------------------------------
(3) Where a verb containing -ip is followed by de and is stressed, the clause in which it occurs is exactly the equivalent to a finite subordinate clause marked by de, i.e., it emphasizes the fact that the action it expresses precedes/preceded that articulated by the main clause:
[Yemek yiyip de] geldim.
I came [having [already] eaten].
I think it already has "already" meaning without "de" as well.
----------------------------------------------
(4) Where the the verb in the superordinate clause contains a negative suffix, the verb obtaining -ip is also typically understood to have negative meaning:
Bu havada herhalde evde oturup televizyon seyretmeyeceğiz!
We´ll hardly be staying indoors and watching the television in this weather!
Yes
oturup televizyon seyret-mek = Sit and watch TV
it (the underlined) can be treated as if just one verb and conjugated as such.
----------------------------------------------
(5) It is also possible, however, for the verb containing -ip to have affirmative meaning despite negative marking of the superordinate verb, as seen in the second example of (4) above. If the clitic de follows -ip in such contexts it serves to emphasize an adversative relation between the two verbs. This is where most of the yes/no confusion comes in. This is the statement that Lewis makes.
Ahmet mesajı bulup da anlamamış mı acaba?
I wonder if Ahmet found the message but didn´t understand [it]?
Yes but you can also put an "and" instead of "but" here.
For example:
x-e uğrayıp y-ye gitmek = visit x and go to y
x-e uğrayıp y-ye gitti = he visited x and went to y
x-e uğrayıp y-ye gitmedi = he visited x and/but didn´t go to y (1)
or = he didn´t visit x and go to y (2)
or = he didn´t visit x but did go to y (3)
as can be seen above different interpretations are possible.
----------------------------------------------
(6) The verb containing -ip can itself be negative-marked only where the superordinate verb is not:
Bu havada evde oturmayıp yürüyüşe çıkmalıyız.
In this weather we must not stay indoors but go out for a walk.
you can also put an "and" here instead of "but"
V1+ip V2 where V1 is a negative verb: this can be used for opting for something instead of something else.
Evde oturmayıp dişarı çıkmak = Not to stay at home but go out
Evde oturmayıp dışarı çıktı = he preferred going out instead of staying at home
x-e gitmeyip y-ye gitmek = go to y instead of going to x
x-e gitmeyip y-ye gitti = he went to y instead of going to x
yerinde duramayıp oynamak
yerinde duramayıp oynamaya başladı = he couldn´t sit but started dancing
ders çalışmayıp oyun oynamak
ders çalışmayıp oyun oynadı = he didn´t study and/but played games
----------------------------------------------
(7) It now becomes more complicated. In subordinate clauses -ip and -arak replace other subordinating suffixes and any other suffixes that follow them. Notice that in the second example, it does not include the -me- and there is no de:
[Kendin gelip görünce] anlayacaksın.
[When you come and see for yourself], you will understand.
[Konuyu bilip fark ettirmediğin]i tahmin ediyorum.
I have a felling [that you know about the matter but you´re not giving it away].
----------------------------------------------
(8) For -ip … -ma constructions that occur on identical verb stems in non-finite noun clauses, they correspond to ´whether/if … (or not)´ in English. The first verb has -ip and the second has -ma- and one of the subordinating suffixes (-dik, -acak, -ma, -mak, or -iş
. The construction expresses affirmative and negative alternatives for the same situation. This is particularly common as objects of verbs of cognition such as bil- ´know´, anla- ´understand´, and fark et- ´notice´ or of the verbs söyle- ´say´, sor- ´ask´:
[Çocukları tatile götürüp götürmemey]e henüz karar vermediler.
They haven´t yet decided [whether or not to take the children on holiday].
Ahmet [Nuran´a Noel hediyesi alıp almayacağın]ı bilmiyor.
Ahmet doesn´t know [whether or not he will buy Nuran a Christmas present].
Elif [kalıp kalmayacağın]ı söyledi mi?
Has Elif said [whether or not she will be staying]?
----------------------------------------------
(9) When used in sentences with nominal predicates, -ip … -ma constructions usually occur as the complement of the postposition konusunda ´about´:
Osman [bu yaz tatile çıkıp çıkmama] konusunda tereddütlüymüş.
Apparently Osman is hesitating about [whether to go on holiday this summer].
----------------------------------------------
There are enough situations here that apparently everyone in the previous discussions was right, if they were talking about the situation that correctly applied to their discussion!
Thank you for your patience, and I hope someone finds this useful -- cim from Texas.
