Learn Hardcore Turkish: Dolaptaki kıyafetleri seçip uyumlu parçaları bir araya getirdim. - I selected the clothes in the wardrobe and put the matching pieces together.

-da/-de/-ta/-te is the locative case (“in/on/at”), here as -ta because of consonant harmony after the voiceless p.
-ki turns the locative phrase into an adjective: “the one(s) that are in the closet.” So dolapta = “in the closet” (adverbial), while dolaptaki = “the (ones) in the closet” (adjectival, modifies a noun). Note: This -ki is the adjectivizer, not the clausal ki that links clauses. It usually stays -ki (in a few set words like bugünkü, you’ll see -kü).

Why can’t I just say dolapta kıyafetleri?

Because dolapta is adverbial; it can’t directly modify a following noun. To say “the clothes in the closet,” you need the adjectival form dolaptaki kıyafetler(i). Without -ki, you’d need a different structure, e.g. Kıyafetler dolapta (“The clothes are in the closet”) as a full clause.

Could I use dolaptan instead of dolaptaki?

Yes, but it changes the nuance:

dolaptaki kıyafetleri = “the clothes that are in the closet” (identifies which clothes).
dolaptan kıyafetleri = “the clothes from the closet” (emphasizes the source/origin). Both can be fine depending on what you want to highlight.

What exactly is kıyafetleri? Is it “the clothes” or “his/her/their clothes”?

It’s ambiguous in isolation:

kıyafet-ler-i can be definite accusative plural: “the clothes” (as a specific direct object).
Or 3rd‑person possessed plural: “his/her/their clothes.” Context disambiguates. If possession is meant, Turkish often adds the possessor: onun kıyafetleri (his/her clothes), onların kıyafetleri (their clothes). In this sentence, it most naturally reads as the definite object “the clothes.”

Why does kıyafetleri have the accusative ending?

Because it’s a specific, definite direct object of seçip (selecting). In Turkish, definite direct objects take the accusative; indefinite ones do not.

Indefinite: kıyafet seçtim (“I selected clothes.”)
Definite: kıyafetleri seçtim (“I selected the clothes.”)

Does uyumlu parçaları also carry the accusative? What does that imply?

Yes. Parça-lar-ı shows plural + definite accusative, so it means “the matching pieces” as a specific set, the direct object of getirdim. If you wanted it indefinite, you would drop the accusative: Uyumlu parçalar bir araya getirdim (“I brought together (some) matching pieces”), which is grammatical but less common in this exact context.

What does -ip in seçip do?

-ip is a converb that links same-subject actions in sequence or in a smooth chain. Seçip means “(having) selected / selecting and then…”. It’s more fluid than using ve (“and”) between full verbs, and it implies the subject is the same as the main verb’s subject.

Example: Gidip aldım = “I went and (then) bought it.”

Could I write seçtim ve … getirdim instead of seçip … getirdim?

Yes. … seçtim ve … getirdim is correct and clear. The -ip form is just more compact and common in narrative sequences.

What’s the difference between seçip and seçerek?

seçip: neutral sequencing (“selected and then …”).
seçerek: manner/means (“by selecting / through selecting”). In many contexts both work, but -erek emphasizes the way something was done, while -ip simply chains actions.

How does bir araya getirmek work, and where should bir araya go?

Bir araya getirmek is an idiom meaning “to bring together; to assemble; to put together.” The usual order is:

[object] + bir araya
- getirmek: Uyumlu parçaları bir araya getirdim. Keep bir araya close to getirmek. Placing bir araya after the object (as above) is the most natural pattern.

Can I say bir arada instead of bir araya here?

No. Bir araya getirmek = “to bring together (motion/result).”
Bir arada means “together (in a state/while being together),” used in expressions like bir arada yaşamak (“to live together”) or bir arada tutmak (“to keep together”). You don’t say bir arada getirmek.

Is bir araya uyumlu parçaları getirdim acceptable?

It’s unnatural. Because bir araya getirmek functions like a unit, bir araya typically sits right before getirmek, and the object comes before bir araya: Uyumlu parçaları bir araya getirdim is the idiomatic order.

What does uyumlu convey here? Is it the same as uygun?

Uyumlu = harmonious, matching/compatible with each other (e.g., colors/styles that go well together).
Uygun = suitable/appropriate (fit for a purpose or context). For outfit pieces that match, uyumlu is the natural choice.

Why is the subject pronoun missing? Who is doing the action?

Turkish marks person on the verb. Getirdim ends with -dim (past tense) + -m (1st‑person singular), so the subject is “I.” Pronouns like ben are only added for emphasis or contrast.

What tense/aspect is getirdim?

Simple past (-di past) with 1st‑person singular: “I brought (together).” If you used -miş (e.g., getirmişim), it would add a hearsay/inferential nuance (“apparently I brought [them] together” / “it turns out I brought [them] together”).

Could I use a different verb instead of bir araya getirmek?

Yes, depending on nuance:

toplamak = to gather/collect (physical gathering, less about matching)
eşleştirmek = to pair/match
kombin yapmak / kombinlemek (colloquial/fashion) = to put an outfit together For the idea of assembling matching items, bir araya getirmek or eşleştirmek are good choices.

Is kıyafet countable? How do I talk about “clothes” vs a single item?

kıyafet can mean “outfit/garment” (countable) or “clothing” generically.
Plural kıyafetler = “clothes.”
With definite accusative: kıyafetleri = “the clothes.” Context decides whether it’s one item or multiple; plural marking -ler makes it clearly multiple.