Bir örnek, mesela bu mesajın türkçe çevirisini, yazabilir misin?
I don’t think it’s as easy to see, but grammar wise it’s really simple. No articles (not even a “the”), there is no concept of “definite” and “indefinite” grammar wise. Things either are defined (my house, that house) or not (any house, one house, two houses) or it doesn’t matter (I’m going to house) grammar wise, no difference.
And really anything is made with suffixes, the only thing that I would consider problematic is remembering the correct order of suffixes. For example above:
çevir-i-si-ni
çevir(-mek): to turn around, exchange, translate
çevir-i: the thing that got turned around, exchanged, translated
çeviri-(s)i: the messages’s (turkish) translation, a genitive construct where message has the genitive ending (-in) and the corresponding possessive suffix (-(s)i) binds them together.
çevirisi-(n)i: accusative case, relating it to “writing”, i. e. write the messages turkish translation.
There are quite a few rules governing vowels and consonants in suffixes but they are highly regular. There are very few exceptions that need to be learned seperately. (and even a lot those can be turned into rules, though I suppose at some point the difference hardly matters)
Most creoles and other such contact languages tend to be analytic, though. Synthetic languages certainly suck for learners, but I’m not sure about why agglutinative doesn’t catch on more easily.
I don’t miss the articles in Russian, and genders seem like a random thing to embed, so that’s all great.
can you write an example, say, this message being translated to Turkish?
Bir örnek, mesela bu mesajın türkçe çevirisini, yazabilir misin?
I don’t think it’s as easy to see, but grammar wise it’s really simple. No articles (not even a “the”), there is no concept of “definite” and “indefinite” grammar wise. Things either are defined (my house, that house) or not (any house, one house, two houses) or it doesn’t matter (I’m going to house) grammar wise, no difference.
And really anything is made with suffixes, the only thing that I would consider problematic is remembering the correct order of suffixes. For example above:
çevir-i-si-ni
çevir(-mek): to turn around, exchange, translate
çevir-i: the thing that got turned around, exchanged, translated
çeviri-(s)i: the messages’s (turkish) translation, a genitive construct where message has the genitive ending (-in) and the corresponding possessive suffix (-(s)i) binds them together.
çevirisi-(n)i: accusative case, relating it to “writing”, i. e. write the messages turkish translation.
There are quite a few rules governing vowels and consonants in suffixes but they are highly regular. There are very few exceptions that need to be learned seperately. (and even a lot those can be turned into rules, though I suppose at some point the difference hardly matters)
Most creoles and other such contact languages tend to be analytic, though. Synthetic languages certainly suck for learners, but I’m not sure about why agglutinative doesn’t catch on more easily.
I don’t miss the articles in Russian, and genders seem like a random thing to embed, so that’s all great.