Learn Hardcore Turkish: Rapordaki yanlış notlar silindi. - The wrong notes in the report were erased.

Rapordaki breaks down as rapor-da-ki: rapor (report) + locative -da (in/on/at) + attributive suffix -ki, giving that is in the report.

How does the -ki suffix work in rapordaki?

The -ki suffix attaches to a noun (often after a case ending) to turn it into an adjective meaning the one(s) in/on/at X. It cannot stand alone and always immediately follows the noun and its case marker.

Why is there no plural suffix on yanlış?

In Turkish, adjectives never take plural endings. Only the noun not takes the plural -lar, so yanlış (incorrect) stays unchanged before notlar (notes).

Why doesn’t yanlış notlar have an accusative suffix -ı?

Because this is a passive sentence. In Turkish passives, the original object becomes the subject and is in the nominative (unmarked), so no accusative -ı is used.

How do we know silindi is passive and how is it formed?

silindi comes from the root sil- (to erase) + passive suffix -in- + past tense -di, so it means was erased/deleted. The -in- part marks the verb as passive.

Why is there no subject pronoun or agent in the sentence?

Turkish often omits the subject when it’s clear or irrelevant. In a passive construction the doer is usually unknown or unimportant, so it’s simply left out.

Could we rephrase it in active voice to specify who did it?

Yes. For example: Birisi rapordaki yanlış notları sildi. Here sildi is the active past tense, birisi means someone, and the object takes accusative notlar-ı.

Is Raporda yanlış notlar silindi acceptable, and how does it differ from Rapordaki yanlış notlar silindi?

“Raporda yanlış notlar silindi” literally means “At/in the report, incorrect notes were deleted,” treating rapor as a location of an action. It’s grammatical but less idiomatic when you want to describe the notes that are in the report. Using rapordaki makes it clear you’re talking about the wrong notes located in the report, not performing an action at the report.