Sotelediğim sosislerin lezzeti muhteşem oldu.

The flavor of the sausages I sautéed was magnificent.

Breakdown of Sotelediğim sosislerin lezzeti muhteşem oldu.

• olmak: to be
• lezzet: the flavor
• muhteşem: magnificent
• sosis: the sausage
• sotelemek: to sauté

Questions & Answers about Sotelediğim sosislerin lezzeti muhteşem oldu.

What kind of word is sotelediğim and how is it formed?

sotelediğim is a relative participle—basically “the one that I sautéed.” It’s built by:

• taking the verb root sotele- (from French “sautéle,” “to sauté”),
• adding the past‐tense marker -di → soteledi (“I/he/you/it sautéed”),
• then attaching the 1st person singular relative suffix -ğim → sotelediğim (“that I sautéed”).

So sotelediğim sosisler literally unpacks as “sauté + past + my‐relative → sausages”: “the sausages that I sautéed.”

Why is there no word equivalent to English “that” or “which” in this relative clause?

Turkish doesn’t use separate relative pronouns like “that” or “which.” Instead, you convert the verb itself into an adjective by adding tense and person‐marking suffixes (e.g. -di, -miş, plus -(i)lan, -(d)ık, -(d)ığım, etc.). That single word then carries the whole “that …ed” or “which …s” meaning.

Why does sosislerin have both -ler and -in suffixes?

Those are two different functions:

• -ler is the plural suffix → sosisler (“sausages”).
• -in is the genitive (possessive) suffix → sosislerin (“of the sausages”).

Here it marks the sausages as the possessor of lezzet (“taste”).

Why is lezzeti singular, and what does the suffix -i denote?

Lezzet (“taste”) stays singular even if its possessor is plural. The suffix -i is the 3rd person singular possessive:

• lezzet = taste
• lezzeti = its taste (in this case, “the taste of the sausages”)

Turkish possession always marks only the possessed noun, not the possessor, inside the phrase.

What nuance does muhteşem oldu carry, and could we use muhteşemdi instead?

• oldu is the past tense of “to become” or “to turn out,” so muhteşem oldu means “it turned out to be wonderful.”
• muhteşemdi would simply state “it was wonderful” (a descriptive past).

You can use muhteşemdi, but muhteşem oldu highlights the result or surprise of the outcome.

Could we say muhteşem lezzeti oldu or muhteşem bir lezzet oldu instead?

• muhteşem lezzeti oldu sounds odd because adjectives in result clauses follow the subject.
• muhteşem bir lezzet oldu is perfectly fine: “it became a wonderful taste.”
  So if you want an indefinite nuance, use bir; to keep the original structure, you say lezzeti muhteşem oldu.

Why is there no article like “the” or “a” before sosislerin?

Turkish has no separate definite/indefinite articles. Context, word order, or number/possessive suffixes carry that information. Here, sosislerin (genitive plural) already implies “of the sausages,” so no extra article is needed.

How do sotelediğim sosisler and sosisleri soteledim differ?

• sosisleri soteledim = “I sautéed the sausages.” (straightforward transitive clause)
• sotelediğim sosisler = “the sausages that I sautéed” (a noun phrase with a relative participle)

The first is a full sentence with subject+verb+object; the second is just a modifier describing “sosisler.”

Why is the word order sotelediğim sosislerin lezzeti muhteşem oldu and not something else?

Turkish generally follows Subject-Object-Verb, but in noun phrases you stack modifiers on the left of the noun:

1. sotelediğim (relative participle) modifies
2. sosislerin (possessor) modifies
3. lezzeti (possessed noun) which is the subject of the clause
4. muhteşem oldu (predicate)

Reordering these would break the modifier-head relationships that Turkish relies on.