Learn Hardcore Turkish: Hâlbuki siz arayacaktınız; numarayı mı kaybettiniz? - You were supposed to call; however, did you lose the number?

It signals a contrast with an expectation: “contrary to what should have happened” or “yet/whereas.” It often adds mild reproach or surprise. Roughly, it sets up “but you were supposed to… and yet…”.

Is hâlbuki formal or old-fashioned? Can I replace it with something else?

It’s common and natural in writing and careful speech. In everyday talk you also hear:

Ama = but (more neutral)
Oysa / oysa ki = whereas/yet (close to hâlbuki) All three work, but hâlbuki and oysa(ki) feel a bit more contrastive than plain ama.

Why is siz explicitly stated? Could it be omitted?

Turkish often drops subject pronouns because the verb ending shows the person. Siz is kept here for emphasis/contrast: “you (as opposed to someone else) were going to call.” Without emphasis, Hâlbuki arayacaktınız… is fine.

How is arayacaktınız built, and what exact meaning does it carry?

It’s the “future-in-the-past,” often implying an arranged plan that didn’t happen.

ara- (call)
-(y)acak (future) → arayacak
-tı (past of that future) → arayacaktı-
-nız (2nd person plural/polite) → arayacaktınız Meaning: “you were going to call / you were supposed to call,” usually with a hint that you didn’t.

How would it differ from arayacaksınız?

Arayacaksınız = “you will call” (future from now).
Arayacaktınız = “you were going to call” (a past plan/expectation, often unfulfilled).

How do I say this informally to one person?

Use the singular forms:

Hâlbuki sen arayacaktın; numarayı mı kaybettin?

Why is there a semicolon between the clauses?

It separates two closely related independent clauses: a contrastive setup and the follow-up question. A comma or a period would also be acceptable stylistically:

Hâlbuki siz arayacaktınız, numarayı mı kaybettiniz?
Hâlbuki siz arayacaktınız. Numarayı mı kaybettiniz?

Why does the question particle mı come after numarayı instead of at the end?

Placing mı/mi/mu/mü after a word focuses the question on that word. Numarayı mı kaybettiniz? highlights “the number” (as opposed to something else). Neutral yes–no questions often put it after the verb phrase: Numarayı kaybettiniz mi?

Is mı always written separately? Why is it mı and not mi/mu/mü?

It’s written as a separate word but phonologically clings to the preceding word.
It obeys vowel harmony, matching the last vowel of the preceding word:
- mı (after a/ı), mi (after e/i), mu (after o/u), mü (after ö/ü). Here, numarayı ends with ı, so we use mı.

Could I also say Numarayı kaybettiniz mi? or Kaybettiniz mi numarayı? Do they sound different?

Yes, both are correct.

Numarayı kaybettiniz mi? is neutral.
Numarayı mı kaybettiniz? focuses on “the number.”
Kaybettiniz mi numarayı? can sound a bit more conversational; the focus is lighter.

Why is it numarayı and not just numara?

Because it’s a specific, known number, so the object is definite and takes the accusative: numara + -(y)ı → numarayı. If it were indefinite, you’d omit accusative:

Bir numara kaybettiniz mi? (Did you lose a number?)

What is the extra y doing in numarayı?

It’s a buffer letter to prevent two vowels from crashing when adding a vowel-initial suffix:

numara + ı → numaraı (awkward) → add buffer y → numarayı.

How is kaybettiniz formed, and why the double t?

kaybet- (to lose)
Past -di with consonant assimilation after a voiceless consonant → -ti
2nd pl/polite -niz So: kaybet- + -ti + -niz → kaybettiniz. The stem ends with t and the suffix begins with t, so they surface as a double tt.

Could I use kaybolmak instead of kaybetmek?

Different voices:

kaybetmek (transitive): “to lose something” → Numarayı kaybettiniz mi?
kaybolmak (intransitive): “to get lost” → Numara kayboldu mu? Both can fit, but the original directly asks whether you lost it.

Is the word order here typical Turkish?

Yes. The finite verb is clause-final:

Clause 1: (S) siz + (V) arayacaktınız (no object, so S–V is fine).
Clause 2: (O) numarayı + (Q) mı + (V) kaybettiniz Turkish is flexible; movement mainly serves emphasis and flow.

Does arayacaktınız imply blame?

It often carries mild reproach/disappointment, because it refers to a plan that didn’t materialize. Context and tone decide how strong it feels.

Any pronunciation/orthography tips for this sentence?

hâlbuki/halbuki: Both spellings occur; the circumflex can mark a longer “a.” Pronounce roughly “hal-bu-ki.”
c in -acak- is like English “j” (as in “jam”), not “ch.”
ı (dotless i) in mı/kaybettiniz/siz is a back unrounded vowel; don’t pronounce it like English “i.”
Double consonant in kaybettiniz lengthens the “t” a bit.

Does siz here mean plural “you,” polite singular “you,” or both?

It can be either:

Polite singular address to one person, or
Plural address to multiple people. The form -niz works for both; only context clarifies which one.