Oh, I see it in your link. Sorry.

But what is the dative -e doing in ´soldier´?

All right. Thank you. I don´t know why it is so difficult for me to understand there is a real, real subject in a passive clause.

No I quoted it correct. It was Mübarek’in açıklamasını yeterli görülmedim. It was here and I saw the video before it disappeared:

http://sahiden.aladagbilisim.com/videos/711/basbakan-erdoganmubarekin-aciklamasini-yeterli-gorulmedim.html

It must have been a misspelling (and of course from all the material this one jumped into my eye). Strange that it was this much wrong in the headline.

After your correction, scalpel, everything is in its place in the sentence even in my opinion.

But as the matter of fact I found it when I was looking for something else. As a result of a serious blackout I couldn’t remember if passive verbs take other persons than sg 3^rd. And: yes, they do.

Dün tam 8 kişi tarafından dövüldüm.

I knew the meaning and I always thought it was passive but I suddenly noticed it could be reflexive, too.

What about this:

               Mübarek’in açıklamasını yeterli görülmedim.

görülmek looks like a passive form but in my opinion it doesn´t fit the picture.

I see. Thanks, scalpel.

Ok, add other people. Why should there be someone in my list who I don´t know?

What does etmeksizin consist of?

            et|mek|siz|in = stem + INF + DER siz ‘without’ + WHAT?

Is it always in the same form?

Does

Ankara’da bulunuyor

literally mean ’he/she/it is found in Ankara’ or ’he/she/it finds himself in Ankara’ ?

What is so strange about that? Finland lost 12 per cent of its land and had to evacuate 400 000 people according to Paris peace 1947. Still we claim we won the war. I mean we can find similar illogicalities in the way history is told in many countries.