I would welcome if any native speaker could clarify the use of 'olmaz' in this sentence. I would assume "there is no big spider' would translate as "Büyük örümcek yok".
Are there semantic differences between alternatives "büyük örümcek olmaz/yok" that we the learners should know about?
"olmaz" is more like "it doesn't happen" or "it never happens". It implies that there isn't now and there won't be any in the future. Because such a thing simply doesn't happen.
Big spiders never come to be. They simply don't exist. There is no such thing.
Oh I see what it means. there are some rather big spiders out there, and that's why I did not think of this meaning at all.
While watching the 50's classic movie Tarantula you do can calm your frightened Turkish girlfriend with this lovely sentence, though. ;-)
"Büyük örümcek olmaz", meaning "There is no such thing as a big spider".
"There is no big spider" ("Büyük örümcek yok").
you can only use this grammatic feature with nouns that have adjectives prior to them. this is a very special feature of the word olmaz BE CAREFUL. you cannot say örümcek olmaz.
to be more clear you can use 'diye bir şey'
Örümcek diye bir şey yok.
Büyük örümcek diye bir şey yok.
Büyük örümcek diye bir şey olmaz.
It's a grammatical word and it has different meanings in different sentences. There is not an exact translation.
'So that' meaning: Konuşuruz diye bekliyorum. -> I'm waiting so that we will talk.
'Called/named/as' meaning: Bedava yemek diye bir şey yoktur. -> There is no such thing as free food.
Ali diye bir çocuk var. -> There is a boy named Ali.
Telefonla ödeme diye/şeklinde bir seçenek var. -> There is an option of paying with phone.
Direct speech meaning: "Yardım" diye bağırdı. -> "Help" he shouted.
In this example, it has the 'called/named' meaning.
Ah that is, I saw it many times, now with this explanation it is much easier. I will write and elaborate this carefully. Many thanks Deorme :)
This sentence may also mean 'The big spider is not compatible give me the other one.' In usual, 'olmaz' may give a 'incompatibility' meaning to sentence.
I'm getting this sentence in the (first?) aorist skill, and the tips and notes don'T cover negatives - so perhaps that's where i'm confused. They do list olmak as one of thirteen irregular verbs that take different vowels for their aorist tense, so i would have guessed "olur" to be the 3rd person singular, and an "m" to be thrown in some place for negative.
Could someone dissect this "olmaz" please? I'm particularly curious about how that "z" landed here...
In negative aorist, all verbs are regular. You add the negative suffix -me/-ma. And Then the personal suffixes are:
Ben ... -m
Sen ... -zsin
O ... -z
Biz ... -yiz
Siz ... -zsiniz
Onlar ... -zler
I have no idea where the z comes from quite frankly.
Well it must be its revenge from being kicked out by a sneaky "k" in (Peter Parker & pals') "biz örümcek olduk"
But, but, this skill was about positive aorist. Duolingo's grammar explanation did not include this totally weird conjugation.
By the way. I already reported it. In tips and notes they are writing that there are 13 irregular verbs, but listing then only 12. I am still waiting to know which verb is the 13th irregular verb.
Yes, sure. In tips and notes is written: 1. 13 single syllable verbs take the tense sign as -ir -ır -ür -ur Yes, there are only 13 irregular verbs, and only in this tense :) These verbs are almak, bilmek, bulmak, durmak, gelmek, görmek, kalmak, olmak, ölmek, sanmak, vermek, vurmak On learning them I wrote them down several times and always thought that my memory does not work because I listed only 12. Finally I saw that there are really only 12 verbs listed in Tips and Notes. But as I said, I already reported this some weeks ago.
They are both correct. The difference is maybe like 'Big spiders don't exist.'(given sentence) and 'There is no big spider.'(your sentence) But it can be expressed and translated in both ways as i stated before.
I don't understand how these irreverent examples are supposed to help us :(