Çadır kazıklarını çaktık ve çadır iplerini bağladık.

Because both are definite direct objects in the sentence, and they are also noun compounds.

Here is the structure:

• çadır kazıklarını = the tent stakes
• çadır iplerini = the tent ropes

In Turkish, in a compound like çadır kazığı or çadır ipi, the second noun takes a compound marker that looks like a 3rd-person possessive suffix:

• kazık → kazıkları
• ip → ipleri

Then, because these are definite objects, Turkish adds the accusative:

• kazıkları → kazıklarını
• ipleri → iplerini

So the ending is not just one suffix doing one job. It contains:

• plural
• the compound/possessive-looking marker
• accusative

Yes:

• çadır = tent
• kazık = stake/peg
• -lar = plural
• -ı = compound marker on the second noun
• -nı = accusative, with a buffer n

So:

• çadır kazıkları = tent stakes
• çadır kazıklarını = the tent stakes

This is a very common Turkish pattern:

• okul kapısı = school gate
• araba kapısı = car door
• çadır ipi = tent rope

Then if you make them definite objects, you add the accusative:

• araba kapısını açtım = I opened the car door

That n is a buffer consonant.

When a noun already ends in a possessive/compound-type suffix and then takes the accusative, Turkish often inserts n before the case ending.

For example:

• kapısı → kapısını
• ipleri → iplerini
• kazıkları → kazıklarını

So the n is there for smooth pronunciation and standard grammar. It is not a separate word or meaning by itself.

By itself, kazıklarını can indeed be ambiguous in some contexts. It could mean things like:

• his/her stakes
• their stakes
• or, in a compound context, the tent stakes

In this sentence, because it is preceded by çadır, the natural reading is the compound meaning:

• çadır kazıklarını = the tent stakes

So here it is not really about possession in the English sense of their. It is the normal Turkish compound structure.

Çaktık comes from çakmak.

In this context, çakmak means:

• to hammer in
• to drive in
• to pound into place

So with kazık it means:

• kazık çakmak = to drive a stake into the ground

çaktık breaks down as:

• çak- = verb stem
• -tı/-ti/-tu/-tü = past tense
• -k = we

So çaktık = we drove in / we hammered in

This is more natural than a very literal English-style verb like hit.

Bağladık comes from bağlamak, meaning to tie or to fasten.

Breakdown:

• bağla- = tie / fasten
• -dı/-di/-du/-dü = past tense
• -k = we

So:

• bağladık = we tied / we fastened

In this sentence, it refers to tying or fastening the tent ropes.

Because Turkish often drops subject pronouns when the verb already shows the subject clearly.

Both verbs end in -k:

• çaktık = we drove in
• bağladık = we tied

So biz is unnecessary unless you want emphasis.

Compare:

• Çadır kazıklarını çaktık. = We drove in the tent stakes.
• Biz çadır kazıklarını çaktık. = We drove in the tent stakes.
  This sounds more emphatic, like contrasting we with someone else.

Because Turkish normally prefers Subject–Object–Verb order.

So this sentence follows a very typical pattern:

• (Biz) = subject, omitted
• çadır kazıklarını = object
• çaktık = verb
• ve
• çadır iplerini = object
• bağladık = verb

A literal structural gloss would be:

• [Tent stakes-the] drove in-we and [tent ropes-the] tied-we

This is completely normal in Turkish.

Word order can change for emphasis, but the version you have is the standard, natural one.

Yes, but that is a slightly different structure.

• çadır kazıkları = tent stakes
  This is a noun compound, like car door or school bus.

• çadırın kazıkları = the tent’s stakes / the stakes of the tent
  This is a more explicit genitive-possessive structure.

Both can be correct, but they do not feel exactly the same.

In your sentence:

• çadır kazıklarını and çadır iplerini are very natural for the general idea of tent stakes and tent ropes.

If you said:

• çadırın kazıklarını çaktık ve çadırın iplerini bağladık

that would sound more like you are talking about the stakes and ropes of a particular tent.

Because the ropes are a definite direct object here.

Turkish often marks a specific, definite object with the accusative.

So:

• çadır ipleri = tent ropes
• çadır iplerini = the tent ropes

In this sentence, the speaker is talking about a specific set of ropes that they tied, so the accusative is expected.

Very roughly:

• ip bağladık would sound odd here
• ipleri bağladık = we tied the ropes

With compounds:

• çadır iplerini bağladık = we tied the tent ropes

These are three letters English speakers often ask about:

• ç = like ch in chair

  • çadır
  • çaktık

• ı = a vowel that does not exist in English

  • It is a relaxed, unrounded vowel, somewhat like the sound in the second syllable of sofa, but not exactly.
  • You hear it in çadır, kazık, çaktık

• ğ usually does not sound like a strong consonant

  • In bağladık, it usually lengthens or softens the vowel before it rather than making a hard g sound.
  • So bağladık is not pronounced like bag-ladik

A rough learner-friendly approximation might be:

• ÇA-dur for çadır
• ka-zuk-la-RI-nu for kazıklarını
• chaK-tuk for çaktık
• baa-la-duk for bağladık

Those are only approximations, but they help at first.

Ve simply means and, and it is perfectly natural here.

But Turkish can also link the actions in other ways. For example:

• Çadır kazıklarını çakıp çadır iplerini bağladık.

Here çakıp means something like having driven in or and then driving in. This version is also natural.

Still, your original sentence with ve is straightforward and easy to understand, especially for learners:

• Çadır kazıklarını çaktık ve çadır iplerini bağladık.