"This event led to a crisis between two countries."
Translation:Bu olay iki ülke arasında bir krize neden oldu.
If you want to write a sentence that is neutral (and I don't mean 'natural'; I mean a sentence where nothing is particularly stressed) Try to follow these three rules:
1) Start the sentence with the subject, end it with the verb.
2) If you have accusative and dative at the same time, it's: accusative first, dative later.
3) words that are more closely related should be together. For example, if you have an accusative/dative and a time expression at the same time, put the accusative/dative closer to the verb: they're more related.
4) Eveything else comes after the subject.
So you have: Subject + everything else + accusative + dative + verb.
In your exercise: This event led to a crisis between two countries.
Subject: This event → Bu olay (our first element in the sentence).
Verb: led → neden oldu (our last element).
Dative: to a crisi → bir krize (should be near the verb)
We don't have an accusative.
So far: Bu olay bir krize neden oldu.
Everything else should come after the subject: Bu olay "everything else" bir krize neden oldu.
Our "everything else" is "between two countries", which is "iki ülke arasında".
So how would you say: "I gave the book to Bookrabbit yesterday after school." ? :)
Perfect explanation. I would like to draw attention to something else.
You can take the part iki ülke arasında bir krize (to a crisis between two countries) as a prepositional phrase. As there are prepositions in English, Turkish has postpositions, and they come before nouns by behaving like any adjective.
Therefore an alternative solution would be;
Subject: Bu olay
Object: iki ülke arasında bir krize
Verb: neden oldu
So we have 1 subject (S), 1 indirect object (O) and 1 verb (V), and Turkish is a SOV language. Guess what to do next..
It was the order of that phrase that I had trouble wıth. Basıcly ıt has the opposıte order of the Englısh sentence. Is that typıcal? Because of the reverse order of ımportance?
I fınd ıt confusıng to remember postposıtıons comıng fırst! Sadly grammatıcal terms just don't stıck in my mind. I remember better in less technical terms. And hopefully it wıll begın to flow at some poınt. I'm sure most turkısh people don't walk around thınkıng ın terms of datıve or accusatıve before they say somethıng.
Yes it's the opposite order. First of all, since arasında (between) is a postposition it goes after the noun unlike English.
between two countries -> iki ülke arasında
Secondly, in Turkish everything that acts like adjectives (prepositional phrases, adjective clauses) comes before nouns. So we have it like
a crisis between two countries -> iki ülke arasında bir kriz
Yes we don't walk around like that but we have a more weird tendency like saying the most important thing at the latest. Verbs are the most important part of the sentences so we put them at the very end. And we usually put the most second important thing that we want to emphasize just before the verb. So the thing before the verb is kind of emphasized.
Ektoraskan's explanation is very true indeed because we also have neutral form (without emphasizing anything) that we use in writing. And this form is like
Subject + Subordinate clause + Locative + Accusative + Ablative + Dative + Adverb + Nominative + Verb
This is actually like the common sense of emphasizing and word order in Turkish. Ablative (from) and dative (to) represent the direction of the motion (verb) and it's the most important part. After the direction, the next important thing is the object that is exposed to the motion. After that the situation and other details of the object or motion come.
I am not so good in grammer myself but almost a year of duo lingo turkish, and daily practice of a least one lesson later, I have picked up most of the sentence structure and most times I just feel that a particular order doesn't sound right. I have in the process picked up a lot of grammer terms too, which did not seem to make much sense back in school but now it does, thanks to the patients of the moderators and my fellow turkish students.
Subject : Ben
I'm very fuzzy about technical grammatical terms, so beyond that I struggle to label things. I'm of the repeat untıl ıt sounds rıght school of language learnıng.
I thınk ıt should be:
Ben okulda sonra kitabı KitapTavşana verdim.
But I'm not at all sure about the ending on the school.
What I really would like to know ıs whether place or tıme should come fırst. I understand that the most ımportant posıtıon ıs just before the verb so crıtıcal words should go there.
Thanks for answerıng:)
okuldaN sonra. Your sentence is correct. If you were to include "dün" (yesterday), it would come before "okuldan sonra". Because of the flow of the events: First you tell us which day it was, then proceed by telling us which part of the day: after school:
Ben dün okuldan sonra kitabı Bookrabbit'e verdim.
If you have an adverb of place, put it after the time expression:
Ben dün okuldan sonra burada kitabı Bookrabbit'e verdim.
Well, why not. :-] Since it's a name, it's hard to tell the exact relation between book and rabbit.
If the OP has chosen "Book rabbit" to mean "A rabbit that belongs to a certain book," then your "kitap tavşanı" translation is correct.
If the name means "A rabbit that happens to be a book," then the book is an adjective, so there is no possessive meaning to it, and "kitap tavşan" will be more accurate. (Just like how you would translate "white rabbit" as "beyaz tavşan".)
For example "Spiderman" is "Örümcek adam." No possessives despite two nouns following one another, because it's not a man that belongs to a spider, but rather a man that also happens to be a spider.
So many people has asked this question without getting an answer.
I think of it like this: if 'between' is about a physical space you need the genitive-possessive, e.g. 'İki ülkenin arasında bir deniz var.'
In this sentence we have to do with an abstract 'between' and that's why the genitive is not needed.
Is my logic correct? I hope so :)
I was confused by expression "neden oldu" because translation "neden" is "why ?" and "oldu" is " it was"
neden here is "reason" (a noun), oldu is "it became"
it became a reason = it caused
olmak is more commonly "become" than "be" -- "it was" is most often simply -di on the appropriate predicate (noun or adjective).
The way I remember and explain "neden oldu" is trying to understand the literal meaning. "Neden oldu" is somewhat close to "why happened" bir krize neden oldu = why a crysis happened. So by analogy I memorize the expression. But isnt it actually another expression closer to "lead"? For example "yol açar"?
turkish is in question form
No, it isn't. Please read all of the comments on the sentence discussion before posting a new one.
(And if you're using a mobile app that doesn't show you the existing comments, please stop using it -- it is not helping you.)
Also... you asked this question one week ago already. Why did you ask it again? Why didn't read the answer that you got that time?