I think the Turkish sentence is stronger than this.

"Terbiyesiz. O dediğin sensin. Ahlaksiz."
"Bastard. Thats you, you immoral."

ladywriter,
thank you for suggesting a website. The link you gave is already in our list in number two:

http://www.turkishclass.com/forumTitle_6_1448

Of course I have checked them all because I had to. I have also checked many other sources in Turkish before I gave the last form to my tables you see above. Even the sources in Turkish have many mistakes let alone websites created by foreigners. There is no standart chart on this field. The version you see above is not available anywhere else.

I hope it will make it easier than verbix for the learners to learn the tenses. Verbix and my charts are different in a number of ways. First of all I havent yet included the question, negative and negative question conjugations.

Other than that verbix following some old dated Turkish sources lists the third person plural personal suffix -lar in the incorrect place.
It suggests geletiler, gelecekmişler, gelecekseler etc. but it should be the other way. I have listed them as geleceklerdi, geleceklermiş, geleceklerse,... with the ler in front of the tense suffix.

Other than that there are many incorrect and outdated entries on verbix. Of course this is not a mistake by the people who created verbix but the Turkish sources are outdated as well.
For instance verbix following Turkish sources suggest the following:
Subjunctive mood tenses

ben geleyim
sen gelesin
o gele
biz gelelim
siz gelesiniz
onlar geleler

I have omitted these except both first persons: ben geleyim, biz gelelim. We don't use the others. We don't say, "sen gelesin", "o gele", "siz gelesiniz", "onlar geleler". These are replaced with imperatives: "Sen gel", "o gelsin", "siz gelin", "onlar gelsin" (or "onlar gelsinler").

If verbix or any other place had the correct version of tenses there wouldnt be a need for me to create new charts. But I couldn't find a single correct chart anywhere.

If you check my imperatives and subjunctives on the first table you will see that they two make a whole tense together. They could be put together with a single name. As far as I know this is the first time the problem with imperatives and subjunctives is solved this way. There is an argument for years about the imperatives and subjunctives.

Erdinç

Hi Bod,
winmekmak has some modifiers. These are on the lower list shown in purple. The first three modifiers are the ones I have mentioned above. The last two modifiers -diyse and -mişse are the ones I have omitted.

example:
main tense: present continuous, modifier -diyse:
gelmek: geliyorduysam, geliyorduysan, ...

main tense: present continuous, modifier -mişse:
gelmek: geliyormuşsam, geliyormuşsan, ...

These double modifiers -diyse (-di + -se) and (-miş + -se) can be omitted.

Merhaba Lyndie,
Geç fark ettim, üzgünüm. Nasılsın? Umarım iyi vakit geçiriyorsundur.
Ayvalık, çok güzel bir yer değil mi? Ben Ayvalık'ta en çok dar sokakları ve eski evleri seviyorum. Akşam olunca kadınlar bu sokaklarda oturup sohbet ediyorlar. Kadınlar kapıların önünde oturuyorlar değil mi?
Ayvalık'ın iç sokaklarında gezerken insan zamanın geçtiğini unutabilir.

Umarım tatilin iyi geçer. HoşÃ§akal.
Erdinç

I was trying to explain to Bod the Turkish tenses and I realised the existing sources were not suitable enough for this study. So here we have Turkish tenses once again shown my way:

We have three auxiliaries to make compound tenses from simple tenses. Now, one by one we will apply these three auxiliaries to the simple tenses.

Later I hope to add translations. Maybe I should remove conjugations and just put personal suffixes so the learners might find the conjugations themselves and the tables would be much smaller. But I´m not sure which way would be easier. At the beginning we had only simple tenses. Afterwards we have derived compound tenses using three different auxiliaries. The conditional auxiliary (-se) could ve applied to the compound tenses once again. This way theoretically it is possible to have double compound tenses but I will omit them as the modern tendency is towards this direction. I have also omitted some other tenses above wich aren´t included in modern Turkish. I have made some changes on the order of suffixes. Many sources show the third person plural suffix (-ler) in the wrong order. This order has changed with time and it is like above in modern Turkish. Some sources show a narrative simple past tense (geldiydim). There is no such tense in Turkish. It will be incorrect using them. Some sources suggest a narrative subjunctive (geleydim, geleydin, geleydi,...) but with time this tense is replaced with the narrative condition (gelseydim, gelseydin, gelseydi,...). So it is omited as well. These are some of the reasons why the other sources were not suitable. Please don´t quote this message if you want to post something.

You post your questions in the related forums. In the starting post I have warned readers not to read other people's answers so it is alright to post your answers here.
My other stories look too silly to me right now. I need to reconsider them.

Yes Bod,
in my above post I too suggested "otlu ekmek".

Your understanding is correct. Unfortunately the dictionary entries like /e/i/den etc. dont cover all possibilities. I don't know why they don't. The information given there is correct but it is usually not the whole of possibilities.

I think it is meant to show whether a verb does or doesnt take an object.

/i/ okumak : obviously takes the accusative (direct objects) as you have understood correctly. So "kitabı okumak" would be correct.

There are small nuances. "kitap okumak" is the act of reading books while "kitabı okumak" is defined. The speaker is talking about a certain book. Here it is "the book" and not "a book". There should be some speech supporting the fact that it is a known book. Otherwise it would not a correct expression.

Because you are using the accusative case it is a defined object. This is contradictory with the English term "a book". A book is any book. Either you can read any book or a certain book.

Therefore the first option would fit better.
1. Kitap okuyorum.
I'm reading a book.

2. Bu kitabı okuyorum.
I'm reading this book. (Here look at the book. It is here.)

3. Kitabı okuyorum.
I'm reading the book (and you know what book I'm talking about).

No there are no other suffixes with o. Turkish doesnt like the vowels o and ö after the first syllable. So this rule is not only affecting the suffixes but all Turkish words as well. There are words that have o and ö after the first syllable but these words are adopted from other languages.

Example: doktor, koro, telefon, motor

Of course I'm not counting the present continous tenses geliyor, gidiyor,... as we already mentioned this as an exception.