1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Turkish
  4. >
  5. "Eğer arkadaşı ile tanıştırsa…

"Eğer arkadaşı ile tanıştırsaydı o grubun üyesi olurduk."

Translation:If he had introduced us to his friend, we would have been members of that group.

March 30, 2015



This sentence makes no sense at all to me and every time i try to get it right following the answers provided by duo, another new version appears!! Weird!!


Native Turkish speaker here, and yes, although it's grammatically correct, the sentence makes no sense and it's weird to use this as an exercise.


Silly sentences are used quite often in Duolingo. Apparently they stick better in our memories.

I think the important grammar points here are "Xsaydı" (if he had Xed) and "olurduk" (we would have become).


That's not what I mean. I recognize the value of silly sentences for learning purposes, but they have to have a certain logic too. Like "Antoine, don't bite your aunt's dog" in the French course is silly, but understandable.

This Turkish sentence right here, on the other hand, is way too contrived for my taste.


Native Turks: How would you say this sentence if Duo's is unnatural?


It's second hand but I asked and she said she would translate it like this:
"Eğer o bizi arkadaşıyla tanıştırmış olsaydı/tanıştırsaydı, o grubun üyesi olurduk."


Thanks a lot. :-) So arkadaşıyla instead of arkadaşı ile, adding of "o" (the subject of the first sentence) and "bizi" (the object of the first sentence). I wonder if all these alterations are necessary to make the sentence meaningful.


I am not a native but I've been studying and using Turkish for about 18 months now. "Arkadaşıyla" and "arkadaşı ile" are both correct, but I think the first version is more common. "Bizi" is required indeed, but the subject "o" seems a bit superfluous to me, because it is implied by the verb suffix "-ydı".


İ hate this sentence!!


Two questions:

1) Is it not quite unclear in Turkish to leave out bizi from the conditional subordinate clause?

2) As I understand it, -saydı makes this an 'Impossible' conditional in Turkish which equates to a Third Conditional in English, so surely the English translation has to be, "If he had introduced us"? "If he introduced us" would be a Second Conditional in English and would require would + infinitive, not would + past infinitive, in the main clause (so "we would be members of that group" - I guess in Turkish the whole thing would come out as eğer arkadaşı ile tanışsa o grubun üyesi oluruz).

  1. It's unclear indeed.

  2. I think the "rule" is:

a. Eğer V+aorist+se, V+aorist → (If I find money, I will go abroad).

b. V+se, V+aorist → (If I found money, I'd go abroad)

c. V+se, V+aorist+past → (If I (had) found money, I'd (have) go(ne) abroad)

d. Eğer V+se+past, V+aorist+past → (If I had found money, I'd have gone abroad)

So… Option C is pretty flexible and can be used for hypothetical facts regarding both present and past. Depending on the context.


Can anyone confirm these rules? They look great and I'd like to use them, however I'd prefer not to if there's an error :)


It Ektoraskan says it, it is gospel truth (he is a course contributor too).


Give him a pretty green circle then :)


Ektoraskan's option C doesn't seem quite right to me... surely the past tense conditional ("If I had found money, I would have gone abroad") can't be formed by using V+se, but should always have V+seydi instead, as shown in option D?

As for the present tense conditional ("If I found money, I'd go abroad"), my grammar book says that the main clause should always have the aorist (not aorist+past). In this light option B would be correct and option C not. But I guess in everyday language aorist+past is used quite a lot even when the conditional clause is in present tense.

  1. It is totally fine in Turkish, as the second part implies it is about us
  2. You are right, it should have been "if he had..". We have a native speaker in our team but sometimes he is not careful at all :D


I am not a native speaker and I don't have all that much experience in Turkish, I can just say that during the past 8 months of quite intensive studying I've never come across a clause where the object ("bizi") was omitted like that. I am inclined to agree with ugurcansayan (and Ektoraskan), it just sounds wrong to me.


"bizi" is required. Cümlede gizli özne olabilir ama gizli nesne diye bir dilbilgisi özelliğinden haberim yok.


It may imply "us" but is it necessary to require it in the answer. Other native speakers seem to accept that it is at least ambiguous so some ambiguity could be expected in the translation.


Being a native speaker doesn't necessarily imply a thorough knowledge of standard English and its grammar. In any event, not being careful is never good when translating.


Normally in Turkish you can say and write "arkadaşıyla" instead of "arkadaşı ile". The both have same meanings. But when i try to write "arkadaşıyla" duo says it's wrong. Please fix this rule.


yes you can. but if it comes up as a listening exercise, it won't be accepted because they do not sounds the same


Where is the "us" in "if he had introduced us to his friend?"


Same question as Jerod I think. I believe it's implied via the uk at the end.


So if the last word in the sentence were 'olurdum', then would the sentence read 'If he had introduced ME to his friend, I would have been a member of that group.'...??


This is a general question to this category: Is there a rule for when we should put eğer at the beginning?


no it is completely optional


This entire question and answer is nonsense...


Could this be, "If he had introduced me to his friend, we would have become members of that group"? I think it makes sense because "olurduk" could be referring to just the speaker and the friend.


You would have to state all pronouns in that case to get that meaning. Otherwise, people would assume it was "us" in this case.


Can anyone just tell me where is the us being indicated in Eğer arkadaşı ile tanıştırsaydı?


It's not implied in the phrase you mention. If there are no pronouns, the object is implied by the suffix on the main verb. This is at least how I interpret the comments regarding this ambiguity-issue.


Thank you! This is I think a must know point :)


The object can not be implied like that, the sentence is simply incorrect. Which is not a very good thing of course, considering that this site is supposed to be "The world's best way to learn a language".

I am not a native speaker myself so just to be sure I asked a Turkish friend of mine whose knowledge of her mother tongue I trust. She confirmed that "bizi" is not optional here, it has to be included.


There doesn't seem to be agreement on this among the course moderators themselves. It seems to be generally agreed upon that's is unclear at best.

So basically there are two rules:
- when speaking or writing, it's better to (over)use pronouns to avoid ambiguity.
- when reading or listening, look at the main verb to solve ambiguity.


You definitely need to ad bizi to be clear to whom he introduced his friend...


This whole section is badly constructed and leaves a lot to be desired. There needs to be more explanations on this subject. I think that there should be a bizi in there because the sentence is ambiguous. It may be that the duk implies the 'us' at the front but if we beginners in Turkish need the bizi, I think it should be accepted


Note, for example, the next sentence 'Eğer onunla karşılaşsaydık ben onunla yemek yerdim' See that the onunla occurs twice showing exactly how the -dik and -dim relate to the person. In this sentence, the English translation really necessitates another her otherwise, the exercise is arranging words so that only one her needs to be used.


When i was given this sentence to translate to English, it already came completely translated. Why?


The Turkish text is wrong!!!


I don't understand why plural is not used in arkadasi and uyesi. (it showed "friends" in the correct translation).


Bu nasil cume lan beynim yandi


This sentence is wrong


Something seems off about this translation. I would have expected the following pair of sentences.

  • Eğer bizi arkadaşı ile tanıştırsaydı o grubun üyesi olurduk.
  • If he had introduced us to his friend, we would have been members of that group.

Selcen says in her comment that the fact that "we" is the subject of the final verb somehow implies that "us" is the direct object of the conditional verb in the if-clause, but that doesn't seem like an obvious conclusion for students, at least not at this point in the course. Is she saying that in Turkish it is common for causative/transitive verbs in an if-clause to have no explicit direct object and that in these cases the subject of the sentence is assumed to be that missing direct object? If this is true, it should definitely be in the Tips section to save students a lot of confusion. Could someone please explain this to me, because I'm not following the logic here.


Why " if you introduced us with his friend we would be members of that group" was not accepted?


In English, you introduce someone to someone, not with :)


How is the "to us" meaning conveyed here?


I believe it's implied via the uk at the end.


It put the answer by itsslf. Okeyyy.... I can not refuse this chance.. Thanks!


Bazen Türkçe cümleleri kurarken çok fazla kısaltıyorsunuz.O,Biz,Siz gibi şahıs zamirleri fiilin içinde gizli olsa da yabancı biri için bunları anlamak zor oluyor. Cümle içinde bunları kullanmak kendi dillerine çevirmede kolaylık sağlar.Cümle "Eğer o,bizi arkadaşı ile tanıştırsaydı,biz o gurubun üyesi olurduk" şeklinde verilmiş olsa hem Türkçe cümle daha iyi anlaşılır, hem de İngilizce cümlesindeki kelimeler daha iyi karşılanır.


The same old story .what does "ile" mean ,not exactly in this sentence but also in other sentences .i do not understand it's correct place in the sentence ,niether it's meaning .


It would make more sense if there weren't a word missing ("bizi") from the Turkish sentence. "Ile" just means "with." In English, you introduce someone to someone else, but in Turkish, you introduce someone with someone else.

  • He introduced us to his friend.
  • O bizi arkadaşı ile tanıştırdı.
  • O bizi arkadaşıyla tanıştırdı.

"Ile" always comes after its object. So "with a book" would be "bir kitap ile." "Ile" can also be used as a suffix in the form of -(y)le or -(y)la, depending on vowel harmony. The "y" is a buffer letter that is used if the suffix attaches to a word that ends in a vowel.

  • with a book = bir kitap ile = bir kitapla
  • with a dog = bir köpek ile = bir köpekle
  • with a frog = bir kurbağa ile = bir kurbağayla
  • with a cat = bir kedi ile = bir kediyle

When used with pronouns, "ile" is usually attached as a suffix, and when it is, the pronoun has to be in genitive form.

  • with me = ben ile = benimle
  • with you (informal) = sen ile = seninle
  • with him/her/it = o ile = onunla
  • with us = biz ile = bizimle
  • with you (formal/plural) = siz ile = sizinle
  • with them = onlar ile = onlarla (not onlarınla; this is an exception)

Turkish used to have no word for "and" until it borrowed "ve" from the Persian language. Before that, "ile" was used to join nouns together, and it can still be used that way.

  • the man and the woman = adam ve kadın = adamla kadın
  • between them = onrların arasında
  • between us and them = bizimle onların arasında

And that's everything I know about "ile."


Could this be 'If he had introduced his friend …?


Kaç Türk buna bakmış bakalım


too much complicated and very poor explanations!!! Duo is urgent to review this chapiter


This is very true. Grammar explanations are not explaining anything.


لو كان عرّف على صديقهِ لكنّا أعضاء في تلك المجموعة.


The bigger the number of comments, the fishier the sentence in question. I think this sort of iffy thing is far too high level and far too subtle to be introduced at this state.


What's the difference if I use "she/her" instead of "he/his"?


olurdu - duydum.


So 'us' is implied?


Can someone please breakdown Tanistirsaydi for me.


Tanış(-mak): meet, get acquainted with.
-Tır: causative mood to change meet into make meet, introduce.
- sa: if.
-y: buffer vowel.
-: third person past tense


In English I think "we would have become members ..." sounds more natural than "we would have been members..."


Why friend and not friends? Is that group consists of one friend?


Arkadaş -> friend.
The group consist of at least 'he' and 'his friend', but a larger party is implied.


No wonder if you are confused. The sentence is bad in any language, and as discussed above, the Turkish version doesn't even seem to be grammatically correct because the object "bizi" was omitted from the first clause.

Apparently a friend of a friend/acquaintance of the speaker is part of some kind of group. The speaker would like to belong to that group too and deplores the fact that the s/he and another person (or other persons) were not introduced to that friend of a friend/acquaintance.


I said the same but it showed a mistake


At which turkish word shows (us) till now i can 't catch il


My question exactly. I dobt dee the we nor the us. And the tips dont mention it anywhere.


If she had introduced her to her friend, we would have been a member of that group. MUST BE ACCEPTED


That's the translation that Google Translate gives, but it is incorrect, because Google Translate doesn't know how to translate this sentence with the direct object for tanıştırsaydı missing.


my answer is correct why you said its wrong


This type of Verbs are really confusing


This sentence make no sense


Why comments are not accepted


Comments open


Where is "us" in this sentence ?


As a native speaker I don't think that adding "ile" as a different word is abnormal. Native speakers would say "arkadaşıyla"


Is the intended meaning "we would have become members"? "Been" makes no logical sense to me here


Where is the 'us' in the first half of this sentence? -'If he had introduced his friend ...' was marked wrong .


Time to remove this sentence!

Learn Turkish in just 5 minutes a day. For free.