| 
    			| 
    					| Language |   |  |  |  |  | Use of the short infinitive |  
	
		| 
			
				| 10. | 16 Sep 2007 Sun 07:36 am |  
				| 
	The "short" form seems to be developed from the "long" form as a result of phonetic changes.
 -e/-i cases and possessive suffixes
 gelmeğ-im > gelme-m
 gelmeğ-e > gelme-y-e
 gelmeğ-i > gelme-y-i
 
 Today "long" form seems to be not used anymore so TDK decided that "short" form should be used.
 
 For genitive, I think it was also similar development for Istanbul Turkish:
 
 gelmeğ-in > gelme-n-in
 
 But take this example:
 
 Kumuk Turkish - İstanbul Turkish
 ALLAHU TAALAĞA İNANMAQNI BAYANI - ALLAHU TEALÂYA İNANMANIN BEYANI
 
 As for your examples, I think it's about getting right which case should be used when.
 
 - Bunu Türkçe yazmayı deniyorum.
 And NOT (as I would have expected): Bunu Türkçe yazmak deniyorum.
 -i case is required here. Nominative case is not used
 
 - Sık sık olması gerekmiyor.
 And NOT (as I would have expected): Sık sık olmak gerekmiyor.
 Both form can be OK with different meanings:
 (Bir şeyin) sık sık olması gerekmiyor.
 Sık sık (orada) olmak gerekmiyor.
 
 And there is a difference in the first and second example:
 
 First one is the object of the verb (hence accusative). And the second one is the subject of the verb.
 
 (Ben) bunu Türkçe yazmayı deniyorum. - (S)OV
 Sık sık olması gerekmiyor. - SV
 |  |  
	
		| 
			
				| 11. | 17 Sep 2007 Mon 11:46 am |  
				| 
	Maybe we can get on the same page about terminology and notice that nowhere did I refer to a "LONG infinitive" but rather the "FULL infinitive" and the short infinitive. I would be happy to use the Turkish terms for these two forms, but I don't know them.
 Discussing this usage and reading up on it has been a big help to me, clearing up most of my confusion. Before learning this, I thought the /ı/,/a/, etc in dictionary entries just referred to noun objects of the verb.
 
 As for Kumyk dialect, maybe I missed the point, but I will leave Daghestani dialects aside for the time being and just try to get my head around standard Turkish.
 
 Thanks for pointing out the difference in the two examples I was asking about:
 [(Ben) bunu Türkçe yazmayı deniyorum. - (S)OV
 Sık sık olması gerekmiyor. - SV]
 
 Now let me ask ANOTHER QUESTION about use of the full infinitive and the short infinitive. Look at these sentences:
 
 (1) Yüzmeğe gittim. (full infinitive)
 (2) Yüzmeye gittim. (short infinitive)
 
 (3) Konuşmağa başladım. (full infinitive)
 (4) Konuşmaya başladım. (short infinitive)
 
 Is there a (yes, subtle) difference in meaning between (1)&(2) and between (3)&(4)?
 
 Ronnie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 |  |  
	
		| 
			
				| 12. | 17 Sep 2007 Mon 12:09 pm |  
				| 
	 | Quoting Malerwinkel: Maybe we can get on the same page about terminology and notice that nowhere did I refer to a "LONG infinitive" but rather the "FULL infinitive" and the short infinitive. I would be happy to use the Turkish terms for these two forms, but I don't know them.
 Discussing this usage and reading up on it has been a big help to me, clearing up most of my confusion. Before learning this, I thought the /ı/,/a/, etc in dictionary entries just referred to noun objects of the verb.
 
 As for Kumyk dialect, maybe I missed the point, but I will leave Daghestani dialects aside for the time being and just try to get my head around standard Turkish.
 
 Thanks for pointing out the difference in the two examples I was asking about:
 [(Ben) bunu Türkçe yazmayı deniyorum. - (S)OV
 Sık sık olması gerekmiyor. - SV]
 
 Now let me ask ANOTHER QUESTION about use of the full infinitive and the short infinitive. Look at these sentences:
 
 (1) Yüzmeğe gittim. (full infinitive)
 (2) Yüzmeye gittim. (short infinitive)
 
 (3) Konuşmağa başladım. (full infinitive)
 (4) Konuşmaya başladım. (short infinitive)
 
 Is there a (yes, subtle) difference in meaning between (1)&(2) and between (3)&(4)?
 
 Ronnie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 | 
My grammar book says "hafif mastar" (light infinitive) for short one. Anyway.
 
 Your examples:
 I see no difference between 1&2 and between 3&4 as a native spaeker. That's also the reason why TDK decided to use 2 and 4 forms only. 2&4 forms seem easy for pronounciation.
 |  |  |