"Sultan Ahmet camisi nerede?"
Translation:Where is the Blue Mosque?
48 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
The key is that in Turkish when indicating possession, both the possessor and the possessed get case endings (i.e., "benim kedim, senin kedin, onun kedisi...). Since "Sultan Ahmet" has no case ending, we know right off the bat that this is not a phrase that shows possession; If we wanted to say "Sultan Ahmet's mosque" it would be "Sultan Ahmet'in camisi" with the "-in" suffix attached to the possessor, as Alex points out above.
Since we know that the "-si" suffix here is not indicating possession due to the lack of a possessive suffix on the possessor (Sultan Ahmet), we know that this suffix must be functioning in its other use: to indicate a compound noun.
Another example of this grammatical construction pointed out by orde90 farther down in this thread is "üniversite öğrencisi" which translates to "university student" or "student of the university." Again, since there is no possessive suffix here on "üniversite," we know that even though we see the "-si" suffix, this phrase does not indicate possession.
For those familiar with it, this compound noun grammatical construction is similar to the idhaafa (إضافة) construction in Arabic, or the izaafe (إضافه) construction in Persian.
sahiplik/-in hali = genitive case, not possessive condition :) Notice that it is not "Sultan Ahmet'in camisi," which has the genitive case (this would be Sultan Ahmet's Mosque). The -si is indeed a possessive suffix, but this is also used to make noun compounds in English (which unlike Turkish, has no possessive markers whatsoever)
Suyu is the 3rd person possessive of "su" (his/her/its water). It's an irregular word. You'd expect it to be "susu" (like camisi) but it's "suyu". More on that here.
Same ending used, slightly different construct. Think of it this way:
taksinin şöförü: the driver of the taxi
taksi şöförü: taxi driver
When the POSSESSOR ending -(n)in is there, it's showing that there is a very close relationship between a specific possessor and specific possessed thing.
When ONLY the "possessed" ending is there -(s)I(n), it's showing a more abstract relationship between the words. That is, they use the same ending to mark a compound word, but without the POSSESSOR ending that would make it more specific.
So similarly:
Sultan Ahmet'in camisi: The mosque belonging to Sultan Ahmet
but
Sultan Ahmet camisi: Sultan Ahmet mosque (compound word)
Türkçede*
Türk Dil Kurumu "Nerde/Burda/Şurda/Orda"yı doğru kabul etmiyor.
meb.gov.tr'den:
13) İçeri, dışarı, ileri, şura, bura, ora, yukarı, aşağı gibi sözler ek aldıklarında sonlarında bulunan ünlüler düşmez: "içerde" değil içeride, "dışardan" değil dışarıdan, "ilerde" değil ileride, şurda değil şurada, "burda" değil burada, "orda" değil orada, "nerde" değil nerede.
I urge you to read these two articles about the "Noun Compounding" in Turkish if you are confused: http://ielanguages.com/turkish-noun-compounds.html http://www.turkishlanguage.co.uk/nouns.htm (search for "Turkish Compound Nouns" section)