Talk:Turkish language

I'd like to offer the following tweaked translation of the Veysel poem at the end of the article to replace the existing one, which I believe more accurately reflects the poet's choice of words, especially with the use of "dear friends" (dost), rather than "friends" (arkadaş):

<poem> I depart, my name remains May dear friends remember me Weddings happen, holidays arrive May dear friends remember me

The soul does not stay caged; it flies away The world is an inn; its visitors depart The moon wanders, the years pass by May dear friends remember me

The soul will depart the body The chimney won't smoke, the hearth won't burn Armfuls of greetings upon you all May dear friends remember me

Myriad flowers bloom and fade Many have laughed, many will laugh Wishes are lies, Death is real May dear friends remember me

Morning, afternoon turn to night Oh, the things that happen to us! Veysel departs, his name remains May dear friends remember me <poem>

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.67.219.194 (talk • contribs) 5:46, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

In the table where it gives the "case of relative pronoun", the pronoun itself, and example sentences in Turkish, with English literal and actual translations, I am confused about whether it is meant that some fields are empty. Is it meant for the section under "case of relative pronoun" is empty for most of the rows? F.ex. there are a number of empty boxes under the "genitive" box. If these are meant to be attributed to the genitive case, then these boxes should be combined so that the genitive case is logically applied to the following rows as well. If not, some explanation should be given. I'm not well read at all vis-a-vis Turkish nor its grammar, so this table is a tad confusing. Thanks in advance! St.Marie-made (talk) 08:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

I propose merging Longest word in Turkish into Turkish language. I think that the content in the former most naturally fits within the context of the latter, and it seems irregular to me that an article exists solely for what amounts to a hypothetical (even if actually printed, though apparently only for the purpose of proving it can be done) extension of the subject matter of what I consider the master article. Specifically, I would place the "longest word" section within the "Vocabulary" heading, and condense any duplicative or extraneous material. Comments? Al Begamut (talk) 21:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

The redirect Turkish Turkish has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15 § Turkish Turkish until a consensus is reached. Golikom (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Please stop changing the map as i have created one in the most detail. Adlogog (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

@Lionel Cristiano: there is no official statue in Syria. Can you edit the map back? Beshogur (talk) 11:48, 30 April 2025 (UTC)

A controversial analysis Contradicts standard view: The Petrova et al. (2006) paper argues that Turkish has a three-way laryngeal contrast (voiced vs. voiceless unaspirated vs. voiceless aspirated) rather than the standard two-way voicing contrast. Focus on phonetic features: The study uses acoustic-phonetic data to claim that what appears to be final devoicing in Turkish is actually more complex and that there are underlying differences based on the presence or absence of both voicing and aspiration. Not a widely accepted conclusion: This conclusion directly challenges the standard understanding of Turkish phonology and has been criticized by other researchers. Later research has found that the phonetic details supporting the three-way contrast are not consistently present across speakers or contexts. The problem with citing one source Basing a Wikipedia entry's claim on a single, controversial paper can be misleading. A balanced and accurate Wikipedia article should: Include the majority view: The article should clearly present the widely accepted analysis of Turkish phonology, which describes a two-way voicing contrast and final-obstruent devoicing. Contextualize alternative theories: It should explain the controversial Petrova et al. analysis and state that it is not the consensus view in linguistics. Include later research: It should reference more recent studies, such as the one by Zhaleh Feizollahi mentioned by Rhodes University (circa 2011), that specifically question or refute the claims of a three-way contrast in Turkish. In summary, the Wikipedia statement, if it reflects only the findings of the Petrova et al. (2006) paper without context, is incorrect and needs to be updated to reflect the broader academic consensus. Simply citing a single paper, especially a controversial one, does not make a claim accurate if it is not representative of the wider body of research. 2600:1700:25DD:3C10:6539:1921:F0E5:ACCA (talk) 00:52, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Genitive and instrumental are not cases. A noun can have only one case and you can combine genitive with any real 5 cases. Examples: köyüne, köyünde. -le is just shorthand for ile not a case ~2025-38658-59 (talk) 20:37, 5 December 2025 (UTC)