4. Konu I: Türkiye’de Atatürk devrimleri — the founding of the Republic, the alphabet, the language and the laws

Translate into English. Büyük Millet Meclisi 23 Nisan 1920’de Ankara’da açıldığında, ülkenin geleceği henüz belirsizdi. Saltanatın kaldırılması ile halifeliğin kaldırılması arasında on altı ay geçti; bu süre, iki kurumun aynı şey olmadığını göstermesi bakımından önemlidir. Cumhuriyet 29 Ekim 1923’te ilan edildiğinde, yeni devletin sınırları Lozan Antlaşması ile üç ay önce belirlenmişti.

1. 01Sentence one, and the converb that sets the time frame

   Büyük Millet Meclisi 23 Nisan 1920’de Ankara’da açıldığında, ülkenin geleceği henüz belirsizdi. Açıldığında is -DIğIndA on the passive of açmak, when it was opened. Note the apostrophes: 1920’de and Ankara’da both need one because both are proper nouns, while ülkenin does not. Henüz with a positive verb means as yet or still; belirsizdi is the adjective plus the past copula. Render: When the Grand National Assembly opened in Ankara on 23 April 1920, the country's future was still uncertain.

2. 02Sentence two, and a nominalised comparison of two dates

   Saltanatın kaldırılması ile halifeliğin kaldırılması arasında on altı ay geçti. Two passive verbal nouns, each with its subject in the genitive: the abolition of the sultanate and the abolition of the caliphate. İle ... arasında, between X and Y, requires the ile on the first term. Geçti, passed. Render: Sixteen months passed between the abolition of the sultanate and the abolition of the caliphate.

3. 03The evaluative clause, and the construction bakımından

   bu süre, iki kurumun aynı şey olmadığını göstermesi bakımından önemlidir. Göstermesi is a verbal noun with a possessive, its showing; bakımından means from the point of view of or in that it. Olmadığını is the negative -DIk nominalisation, that they were not the same thing, the object of göstermek. Önemlidir carries the formal -DIr. Render: that period is significant in that it shows the two institutions were not the same thing.

4. 04Sentence three, and the past perfect that orders the events

   Cumhuriyet 29 Ekim 1923’te ilan edildiğinde, yeni devletin sınırları Lozan Antlaşması ile üç ay önce belirlenmişti. İlan edildiğinde is again -DIğIndA on a passive. Belirlenmişti is the passive plus the reported past plus the narrative marker — the past perfect, and it is doing real work: the borders had been settled before the proclamation, and an English version using were settled would lose the sequence. İle here is instrumental, by the Treaty. Render: When the Republic was proclaimed on 29 October 1923, the borders of the new state had been settled three months earlier by the Treaty of Lausanne.

Result: When the Grand National Assembly opened in Ankara on 23 April 1920, the country's future was still uncertain. Sixteen months passed between the abolition of the sultanate and the abolition of the caliphate; that period is significant in that it shows the two institutions were not the same thing. When the Republic was proclaimed on 29 October 1923, the borders of the new state had been settled three months earlier by the Treaty of Lausanne.

Translate into Turkish. The civil code adopted in 1926 gave daughters and sons equal shares in an inheritance and made civil marriage the only legally valid form. How quickly this changed practice in the countryside is a question historians still argue about.

1. 01The civil code adopted in 1926

   1926’da kabul edilen Medeni Kanun. Kabul edilen is the -(y)An participle on a passive, which is adopted. 1926’da needs the apostrophe. Note that Medeni Kanun is a proper name and takes capitals; if a case suffix follows it, that too takes an apostrophe — Medeni Kanun’un, Medeni Kanun’a. A candidate who writes Medeni Kanunun has produced a form that could be read as a common noun and has lost a segment.

2. 02gave daughters and sons equal shares in an inheritance

   kız ve erkek çocuklara mirastan eşit pay verdi. Vermek takes the dative for the recipient, so çocuklara. Mirastan pay is a share from the inheritance, with the ablative on miras — Turkish takes the share out of the estate rather than in it. Eşit pay stays indefinite and takes no accusative because it is an indefinite object. Kız ve erkek çocuklar, daughters and sons, is the natural phrasing; kızlar ve oğullar would also work but is less usual in legal register.

3. 03and made civil marriage the only legally valid form

   ve resmî nikâhı hukuken geçerli tek biçim hâline getirdi. Resmî nikâhı takes the accusative because it is a definite object. Hâline getirmek, to turn into, takes the thing turned into with hâl in the possessed dative — a fixed construction worth learning whole. Hukuken, legally, is an adverb formed with the Arabic-derived -en suffix, which is common in legal Turkish; hukuki olarak would also serve. Nikâh carries the circumflex.

4. 04How quickly this changed practice in the countryside is a question historians still argue about

   Bunun kırsal bölgelerde uygulamayı ne kadar hızlı değiştirdiği, tarihçilerin hâlâ tartıştığı bir sorudur. The whole first clause is a -DIk nominalisation with bunun in the genitive as its subject, and ne kadar hızlı embedded inside it — this is how Turkish embeds an indirect question. Tarihçilerin tartıştığı is a second -DIk participle with its own genitive agent, modifying soru. Sorudur takes the formal -DIr. Two stacked nominalisations in one sentence is precisely what the AO3 range grid means by complex language.

Result: 1926’da kabul edilen Medeni Kanun, kız ve erkek çocuklara mirastan eşit pay verdi ve resmî nikâhı hukuken geçerli tek biçim hâline getirdi. Bunun kırsal bölgelerde uygulamayı ne kadar hızlı değiştirdiği, tarihçilerin hâlâ tartıştığı bir sorudur.

You hear a short archive-based feature about the alphabet reform. Work the method Section A rewards.

1. 01Use individual control from the start

   You may stop, revisit and replay any part of the recording as often as you like, and a commemorative feature is exactly the kind of source where that matters, because it mixes narration with archive voices in an older register. Read every question first, then play once for architecture: where does the narration stop and the archive begin, how many speakers are there, and which question maps to which stretch.

2. 02Expect older vocabulary and do not panic at it

   A feature of this kind will contain words the modern language has largely replaced — maarif for education, mekteb for school, harf inkılâbı for the alphabet reform, lisan for language. You are not expected to produce them, only to recognise enough to follow. Where a word defeats you, the surrounding syntax usually carries the answer: a nominalisation in the accusative before belirtti is a reported proposition whatever the noun inside it happens to be.

3. 03Answer a summary-type question with the required number of points

   Section A includes questions testing summary skills, and they specify how many points are wanted. If a question asks for three reasons given in the recording for the speed of the change, give exactly three, each in its own clause, each distinct: Yeni harflerin öğrenilmesi kolaydı; Millet Mektepleri ülke çapında açıldı; gazeteler ve resmî belgeler kısa sürede yeni harflere geçti. Four points do not earn a fourth mark and a blended pair may earn only one.

4. 04Check the case endings before you hand it in

   Answers to Paper 3 are written in Turkish and marked for accuracy as well as for content, and under time pressure the endings are what slip. The commonest three: a definite object without its accusative, a dative verb given an accusative object, and a missing buffer consonant. Reading your own answer once looking only at endings, and not at content, catches most of them in under a minute.

Result: Model summary answer in Turkish, three points: Yeni harflerin öğrenilmesi kolaydı; Millet Mektepleri ülke çapında açıldı; gazeteler ve resmî belgeler kısa sürede yeni harflere geçti.

Your research subject is not this, but a Section C or Section B question may require a paragraph on it. Draft one that makes an argument.

1. 01Choose a claim that a reader could dispute

   A narrative paragraph says what happened and scores modestly. An argumentative one takes a position. A good one here: the language reform is unusual among the reforms in that it is not finished, because its object was a living practice rather than an institution. That claim is defensible, it is interesting, and it organises the evidence rather than being illustrated by it.

2. 02Draft the claim in Turkish, in one sentence

   Dil Devrimi, diğer inkılâplardan bir noktada ayrılır: konusu bir kurum değil, canlı bir kullanım olduğu için hiçbir zaman tamamlanmış sayılamaz. Note ayrılmak with the ablative for to differ from; the -DIk plus için causal; and sayılamaz, the negative potential of the passive of saymak — cannot be considered. The colon after ayrılır is doing English-style work and is entirely acceptable in modern Turkish.

3. 03Support it with the evidence that is actually available

   Bir kanunla harflerin değiştirilmesi bir günde yürürlüğe girebilir; ancak bir sözcüğün yerine bir başkasının geçmesi, konuşanların onu kullanmasına bağlıdır. Nitekim bugün hem ulus hem millet, hem yanıt hem cevap kullanılmakta, seçim çoğu zaman üsluba göre yapılmaktadır. The contrast between a law taking effect in a day and usage changing over generations is the mechanism; the surviving doublets are the evidence; nitekim, indeed or as evidence of this, is exactly the connective for moving from claim to instance.

4. 04Close by naming the disagreement without resolving it

   Bu sürecin nereye kadar götürülmesi gerektiği, 1930’lardan bu yana tartışılmakta ve tartışma zaman zaman siyasi bir renk almaktadır. Two things make this a good closing sentence: götürülmesi gerektiği is a nominalised necessity clause carrying how far it ought to be taken, which is precisely the shape of the disagreement; and siyasi bir renk almak, to take on a political colour, states that the argument is politicised without taking a side in it.

Result: Dil Devrimi, diğer inkılâplardan bir noktada ayrılır: konusu bir kurum değil, canlı bir kullanım olduğu için hiçbir zaman tamamlanmış sayılamaz. Bir kanunla harflerin değiştirilmesi bir günde yürürlüğe girebilir; ancak bir sözcüğün yerine bir başkasının geçmesi, konuşanların onu kullanmasına bağlıdır. Bu sürecin nereye kadar götürülmesi gerektiği, 1930’lardan bu yana tartışılmaktadır.

A Section C-style statement on this material might read: Atatürk devrimleri, Türk toplumunda derin ve kalıcı bir değişim yaratmıştır. Draft a paragraph and then check it against the three grids.

1. 01Separate the two claims inside the statement

   The statement makes two claims joined by an and: that the change was deep, and that it was lasting. They are separable and they are supported by different evidence. Lastingness is comparatively easy to argue: the alphabet, the calendar, the civil code and the surname requirement are all still in force a century later. Depth is much harder, because it is a claim about society rather than about law. Splitting the statement is itself an analytical move and worth doing in the first sentence.

2. 02Draft the paragraph

   İfade iki ayrı iddia içeriyor ve bunlar aynı kanıtla desteklenemez. Kalıcılık konusunda tartışma azdır: 1928 harfleri, 1926 Medeni Kanunu ve 1934 Soyadı Kanunu bugün hâlâ yürürlüktedir. Derinlik ise farklı bir sorudur; kanunun yürürlükte olması, uygulamanın her bölgede aynı hızda yerleştiği anlamına gelmez. Nitekim kimi tarihçiler değişimin kentlerde çok daha hızlı benimsendiğini vurgulamaktadır.

3. 03Add the candidate's own judgement, marked as such

   Bana göre ifadeye kalıcılık bakımından katılmak, derinlik bakımından ise ihtiyatlı olmak gerekir. Katılmak takes the dative — ifadeye katılmak — and bakımından, in respect of, lets you agree with one half and qualify the other in a single sentence. Bana göre puts the judgement in the first person, which is what tells an examiner that the preceding attributions were deliberate rather than accidental.

4. 04Check against the three grids, one at a time

   AO4, twenty marks: the paragraph names four dated measures, distinguishes two claims, reports a historians' disagreement and reaches a qualified conclusion — knowledge and critical analysis both present. AO2, ten marks: in the real examination this paragraph must also draw on the unseen text, and a version that never quotes or uses it forfeits marks here however good the history is. AO3, ten marks: the paragraph contains a passive, a nominalised clause, a negative nominalisation with anlamına gelmez, a formal -mAktAdIr and two connectives, which is range, and the endings must now be checked one by one, which is accuracy.

Result: İfade iki ayrı iddia içeriyor ve bunlar aynı kanıtla desteklenemez. Kalıcılık konusunda tartışma azdır: 1928 harfleri, 1926 Medeni Kanunu ve 1934 Soyadı Kanunu bugün hâlâ yürürlüktedir. Derinlik ise farklı bir sorudur; kanunun yürürlükte olması, uygulamanın her bölgede aynı hızda yerleştiği anlamına gelmez. Bana göre ifadeye kalıcılık bakımından katılmak, derinlik bakımından ise ihtiyatlı olmak gerekir.