Learn Hardcore Turkish: Bütçe sınırlı, bu yüzden teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık. - The budget is limited, therefore we had to decline the offer.

Because the offer is definite/specific. In Turkish, definite direct objects take the accusative ending (-ı/-i/-u/-ü by vowel harmony). Here, teklif + i → teklifi.

Definite: Teklifi reddettik. = We rejected the (particular) offer.
Indefinite: Bir teklif reddettik. = We rejected an offer. Avoid bir teklifi unless you literally mean “one particular offer” from a known set (more naturally: Tekliflerden birini reddettik.).

Why use the infinitive reddetmek instead of a finite verb like reddettik?

The construction … zorunda kalmak (“to end up having to …”) takes a verb in the infinitive (-mek/-mak). So you say:

… teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık. = we ended up having to reject the offer. If you just narrate the action without “having to,” you’d use a finite verb:
Teklifi reddettik. = we rejected the offer.

What does zorunda kalmak literally mean, and how is it different from zorundaydık?

Literally, zorunda kalmak is “to remain in a state of obligation,” i.e., to be forced by circumstances. It emphasizes external compulsion at that moment.
… zorundaydık (“we were obliged/required”) states an obligation as a state, a bit more neutral about the source of pressure. Both can translate “had to,” but:
Zorunda kaldık = we were compelled (circumstances forced our hand).
Zorundaydık = we were under an obligation (state/fact of obligation). A near-synonym for extra emphasis is mecbur kaldık (“we were compelled”).

Should it be Bütçe sınırlı or Bütçe sınırlıydı to match the past tense?

Both occur:

Bütçe sınırlı, … kaldık. Natural in speech; the stative description (“the budget is limited”) is presented as background even if the main verb is past.
Bütçe sınırlıydı, … kaldık. Tighter past-time agreement; many prefer this in careful writing for a single past situation. Choose based on whether you mean a general condition (present-like) or a specific past situation.

What’s the difference between bu yüzden and çünkü, and can I flip the clauses?

bu yüzden means “therefore/so” and introduces the result: Cause → Result.
- Bütçe sınırlı(ydı), bu yüzden teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık.
çünkü means “because” and introduces the cause: Result → Cause.
- Teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık çünkü bütçe sınırlı(ydı). Both are fine; just keep the logic consistent.

Are there synonyms for bu yüzden, and do they differ in tone?

Yes:

Neutral/formal: bu nedenle, bu sebeple, bundan dolayı, dolayısıyla
Conversational: o yüzden All mean roughly “therefore/so,” with dolayısıyla sounding more formal and o yüzden more casual.

Can I change the word order?

Yes. Natural variants include:

Bu yüzden teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık.
Teklifi bu yüzden reddetmek zorunda kaldık.
Teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık, çünkü bütçe sınırlı(ydı). Avoid pulling the object out of the infinitive phrase in a way that breaks it, e.g., Reddetmek zorunda kaldık teklifi sounds awkward; keep teklifi with reddetmek.

Why is reddetmek written together with a double d?

It’s a lexicalized compound from red + etmek, written together as reddetmek, with the final d doubling for smooth pronunciation. Conjugations keep the double d:

reddediyorum, reddettik, reddedeceğiz Do not write or say red etmek as two words in standard modern Turkish.

What part of speech is sınırlı here?

It’s an adjective used predicatively in a nominal sentence (a sentence without an explicit “to be” verb). Turkish often omits “to be” in the present:

Bütçe sınırlı. = “The budget is limited.” For past, add the past copula: sınırlıydı (“was limited”).

Would bütçemiz be better than bütçe?

Use bütçemiz (“our budget”) when you want to specify it’s your team/company’s budget:

Bütçemiz sınırlı(ydı), bu yüzden … Using bare bütçe can mean “the budget” of the project/context you’re discussing, and is often understood from context.

Is the comma before bu yüzden okay? Should it be a semicolon?

Both a comma and a semicolon are acceptable:

Bütçe sınırlı, bu yüzden … (common in everyday writing)
Bütçe sınırlı; bu yüzden … (clear and stylistically neat) A semicolon cleanly separates two independent clauses connected by a sentence adverb like bu yüzden.

How do I negate or ask with zorunda kalmak?

Negation: … reddetmek zorunda kalmadık. = We didn’t have to reject (we didn’t end up being forced).
Question: … reddetmek zorunda kaldık mı? Note the nuance: … zorunda değildik means “we were not under an obligation,” while … zorunda kalmadık emphasizes that circumstances didn’t force it.

Can I replace teklifi with a pronoun?

Yes, if the referent is clear:

Onu reddetmek zorunda kaldık. = We had to reject it. You can also specify with a demonstrative:
Bu teklifi/Şu teklifi reddetmek zorunda kaldık.

What exactly does teklif cover?

It can mean “offer/proposal/bid/quote/suggestion,” depending on context. In business contexts it’s often “offer/quote/bid.” For a more purely “suggestion/idea,” öneri is common.

Is there a difference between sınırlı and kısıtlı?

They overlap and are often interchangeable with budgets:

sınırlı = limited (bounded, finite)
kısıtlı = restricted/insufficient (constraint implied) Both are idiomatic with bütçe; kısıtlı can feel a touch more colloquial.