This is, of course, none of my business  -  I wish you will find the help you need, ayse-eski  -  but I wish everyone here remembered teaching a language is professional work. It takes years of studying and it´s a job that should be paid for. Not every native speaker can help you. These people who share their knowledge in this site are doing it from their kind heart and it´s all charity from their side.

No one can pour the knowledge into another person´s head. If you look for something easy you will probably end up with one of those scams which you mentioned. Once books and net sites on Turkish language are available, the best thing is to sit down and be a schoolgirl or -boy again. If problems appear as they tend to appear bring them up in the forum. Someone will help you and we all benefit.

Of course a private teacher could be of much help. He can bite the material half-soft for you. If I had money which I dont have I would use it ecologically for a service like that. Until that day I will have to do it the difficult way.

What is a little shortage in this forum is that as far as I know learners do no co-operate, discuss and support each other. Everyone works on his or her own. Actually there is not even a place for discussion like that. If you put your own message in a thread someone else has started (as I am doing now) there is a danger that the original question will not be noticed.

Thank you for the corrections, gokuyum.

I bet all those lexical faults sound funny but I´m not so worried about them. There is one grammar mistake which makes me angry but maybe it´s better not to mention it...maybe there is someone who doesn´t notice. Tense faults are very hard to correct: I try to choose them using all my knowledge but still make wrong decisions. What it takes, I guess, is more reading and listening.

A couple of notes:

- Is var/değil olduk wrong in every situation or in this case specifically?

- Why batacak but gidecek? Bitecek or bidecek? Yatacak or yadacak?

I tried to translate an old fable which I like:

Thanks, passer-by and si++. İyi günler.

     When you study Turkish syntax one of the first things you have to forget about is the whole idea of subordinate clauses. What is said using subordinate clauses in English, for instance, is verbalized by participle and infinitive structures, -se-/-sa-tense, sometimes by lexical means and suffixes like -iken and -ki. In other words, the job we have given to subordinate clauses is split into many pieces in Turkish. I guess this is what different language structure means: you can´t even use the same headlines when you discuss it.

     They are all difficult for me but I noticed there is a special gap in my knowledge what comes to indirect questions. I tried a small series of sentences just for fun. I´m not sure about them (please, correct me), but I think I understand roughly how to build them. Except one: How is a mi/mı/mu/mü -question "drowned" as a modifier into the sentence?

 Sağ olun, si++!

The good news is as far as I know nobody was ever banned from this site because of poor Turkish. I checked.

     I understand what you mean: the nominative object is somehow tied to the predicate and a part of it, as the accusative makes the object a unit of its own right even though it is of course a modifier of the verb.

     What these new examples bring to my mind is cohesion of the sentence. The word order is quite strict in Turkish at least what comes to subject and predicate. Where the speaker is given more or less free hands is in the middle of the sentence where there all the modifiers are packed. Sometimes it is quite crowded in the middle (I know). When the language has the means to mark the object apart from all the other stuff isn´t it logical that this means, the accusative case, is used, especially if the object is physically apart from its main word, the predicate? It simply makes the sentence clearer.

     Besides, what you said earlier about the accusative object whose more details are given later it might be part of the explanation on a semantic level. This should be tested with sentences which have no other differences except the case of the object.

     Maybe the problem can be studied from different corners. You should write and publish an article in order to benefit from it. You are a linguist of course, aren´t you?

     Wow. I just noticed bir and accusative ending in the same word...

     P.S. A couple of sentences jumped into my eyes and they resemble your examples:

     Ankara´ya gitmek istiyorum.

     Ankara´ya gitmeyi çok istiyorum.

     Maybe the phenomen goes to infinitives as well?

I´ll move this topic to the Practice section where it belongs and where it should have been in the first place.

The sentences below are from accident announcements that car drivers have written to there insurance companies. Poor writing skills and an attempt to look innocent in the reader´s eyes have changed the meaning to something odd and funny but as the sentences are quite normal in structure I thougt I could practice with them.

 I am confused about the past necessitative. First of all, there seem to be two tense signs in the same word:

Gitmeliydim.

Do -meli- and -di- refer to the same situation or has one of them something to do with the truth of the situation? I mean is it translated

1. ´I had to go´ or

2. ´I must have gone´?

I began to read the novel Gölgesizler (as a translation). From the very first pages I felt I touched something valuable and I feel like reading it loud. Actually I feel jealous: how can someone fade out the limit between reality and the inner life of a human being in such a beautiful manner? Toptaş reminds me of Kafka and Garcia Márquez.