1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Turkish
  4. >
  5. "I would like to meet the wri…

"I would like to meet the writer who wrote that book very much."

Translation:O kitabı yazan yazar ile tanışmayı çok isterim.

May 24, 2015



If "istemek" usually takes a full infinitive form of the verb, why is it "tanışmayı" here?


Because it's not in the immediate vicinity of the verb. If you separate the object from its verb, you have to use the accusative.

Put "çok" at the end, and the infinitive is fine: O kitabı yazan yazar ile tanışmak isterim çok.


Why not "tanışmağı" here?


The word order in the English translation is not conventional and sounds unnatural. The intensifier, "very much", should be placed closer to the verb.

"I would very much like to meet the writer who wrote that book".


Why is çok tanışmak isterim wrong?


That would change the meaning from "I very much want to meet..." (lots of wanting), to "I want to very much meet..." (lots of meeting).


Neden kitabı? Neden kitap yanlış burada?


Kıtap here is definite object, so it takes the accusative


"O kitabı yazan yazarla tanışmayı çok severim" is not accepted. Is it actually wrong?


Because "I would like" doesn't mean "I like". It means "I want".


What does yazan yazar mean exactly?


the writer who wrote


Is 'isterdim' also correct for 'I would like'?


İsterdim means i used to want


What's the point of / ile / here?


The reason is that 'tanımak' takes ile:

tanımak biriyle = to meet someone
(biri ile -> biriyle)


Why do we have to use the gerund here? Would tanışmak be a valid alternative?


I also wonder about that. In the sentence about meeting the person who translated the poem "tanışmak" was correct


Here "to meet" is the direct object of the verb "would like/want." When there are any words ("çok") between the direct object and the verb, the object has to be marked accusative, so that means using the short infinitive: tanışma + yı.


I have the same doubt too.


Why doesn't "Yazar" take the accusative here? There are actually two direct objects in this sentence 1) the writer 2) the book


Yes, "the writer" is a direct object whereas "yazar" in the Turkish sentence isn't.
Here "yazar" and "ile" belong together so there will be no accusative.
tanımak biriyle = to meet someone


Great explanation! Thank you lots!


Rica ederim ! You are welcome !


I would say that "yazar" is still the direct object of "tanışmak" - but it doesn't take the accusative case because the verb requires the instrumental case: yazarla or yazar ile.


Hi danikaadams,

concerning the meaning and the instrumental case I absolutely agree to your explanation.

I think it's a question about grammatical terms. As far as I know "direct object" always means "it is accusative case" at least in English.
Anyway, I do not know whether you could tell any subject of an instrumental case "direct object" in Turkish.


All it takes to make a direct object is that it receives the action of a transitive verb, right? Direct objects can be specific or general, but only the specific would take the accusative case, so there are definitely direct objects that are not accusative.

I have been trying to think of examples of verb/direct-object pairs that behave like this in English, but I think that the language is too reliant on helping verbs and prepositions! For instance, you could say "I met Marie" - where "Marie" is clearly the (specific) direct object. But if you say "I met with Marie" (which has a different meaning) - I do not think that the direct object is "with Marie." I think probably that the verb has changed to "met with" instead, and "Marie" is still the (specific) direct object.

Obviously, both tanışmak and buluşmak are transitive verbs that require direct objects, yet both phrases would take the instrumental in Turkish:
Marie'le [Marie ile] tanıştım = I met Marie.
Marie'le [Marie ile] buluştum = I met with Marie.

That is what leaves me thinking that "Marie'le" is the (specific) direct object in both, despite not having the accusative case.


o kitabı yazan yazar ile tanıştığımı çok isterim yanlış mu?


I think the range of meanings for -dik- is just accusative relatives (aldığım bir tavuk 'a chicken I bought'), time relatives (tavuğu aldığımda kedim mutlu oldu 'when I bought the chicken my cat got happy'), and reported facts (çiftçi kedim tavuğumu yediğini bana dedi 'the farmer told me my cat ate my chicken').


I think that should be kedimin tavuğumu yediğini actually

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