# Sevmek with direct object ending or not?



## Lodzubelieveit

In a basic Turkish book I'm studying, it has the following piece of dialogue for three friends sitting around chatting, i.e. a fictional conversation:

1: Ben ve Gökhan futbol, basketbol, voleybol ve tenis seviyoruz.
2: Ama en çok futbolu.
3: Biz denizi ve dansı, günlük gezileri seviyoruz.

I think I can understand why in 2. and in the first part of 3. the underlined direct object ending is used with 'sevmek'. My understanding is that in 2, the speaker has to indicate which word in his statement is the direct object, and that in 3, for the first instance, the speaker likes one particular sea, not seas in general. Is that right?

My query is why there is 'dansı' (and günlük gezileri) in 3., but not, for example, 'futbolu' in 1. Is it because there are many types of dancing (and sorts of day trip), and speaker 3 only likes one of them, but there is essentially only one sport of football? Is saying 'futbolu' etc. possible in 1? If so, would it change the meaning?



PS I think the translation would be (checking the back of my book, this seems to be OK):

1: Gökhan and I like football, basketball, volleyball and tennis.
2: But most of all football.
3: We like the sea, dancing and day trips.


----------



## Gemmenita

Merhaba,
In 1. that's right and because we talk in general.
But in 2. and 3. that's not because of a particular sea or many types. If you think so, it would be more complicated!
The only difference which comes to my mind is that in 2. and 3. there is an idea of comparison,* regarding the context*. (by comparison I mean people are *giving their ideas* and not a real comparison!)
1. means "Gökhan and I *in general* like football, basketball, volleyball and tennis."
If 1. was in a context where everybody gave his idea about himself or even about others, the structure of 2. and 3. would also be correct and used for 1. and it could be "Ben ve Gökhan futbol, basketbol, voleybol ve tenis*i* seviyoruz."


----------



## Lodzubelieveit

> The only difference which comes to my mind is that in 2. and 3. there is an idea of comparison,* regarding the context*. (by comparison I mean people are *giving their ideas* and not a real comparison!)



So, to clarify, do you mean that there are no direct object endings in 1. because it is the first statement in the conversation, but there are in 2. and 3. because these come after and 'compare' with the opinion expressed in 1.?

And there's nothing special about the nouns 'futbol', 'basketbol' etc compared with other nouns, which means they go without the ending?


----------



## Rallino

The first sentence sounds odd to me. I would definitely use the accusative there.


----------



## Gemmenita

Lodzubelieveit said:


> So, to clarify, do you mean that there are no direct object endings in 1. because it is the first statement in the conversation, but there are in 2. and 3. because these come after and 'compare' with the opinion expressed in 1.?
> 
> And there's nothing special about the nouns 'futbol', 'basketbol' etc compared with other nouns, which means they go without the ending?




You know, the correct form of _sevmek _is "bir şey*i* sevmek", means you must use DO endings.
But if you are sure that 1. is correct and doesn't have a typographical  error, so as I said it can be either because of talking in general,
or being the first sentence (not entering yet in the conversation) or even because of the "enumeration" of some nouns!

ps. It could be rather "Ben ve Gökhan futbol, basketbol, voleybol ve tenis *oynamayı *seviyoruz.


----------



## Lodzubelieveit

I can't be 100% sure that it's not a typo, and part of my question came about because a few pages earlier in the same book they said you must use DO endings with sevmek, but I don't think it's likely to be a mistake.

I'll take it from what you both say that you can't go wrong using DO endings with sevmek, but there might possibly be some situations when they aren't necessary.

Thanks for your help.


----------



## Gemmenita

*Rica ederim! İyi şanslar!*


----------

