Learn Hardcore Turkish: Çıktıları bekleme odasına koyarak insanlara zaman kazandırdık. - By placing the printouts in the waiting room, we saved people time.

-arak/-erek turns a verb into an adverbial form meaning “by doing,” “while doing,” or “as a means of doing.”
So koyarak = “by putting/placing.”
It often expresses the means or manner that leads to the main action. Here, putting the items somewhere is the means that resulted in saving time.
It follows vowel harmony: back vowels → -arak, front vowels → -erek.

Why is çıktıları marked with -ı? Isn’t that a possessive ending?

çıktı-lar-ı here is most naturally “the printouts” with plural + accusative: plural -lar
- accusative -(y)ı.
In Turkish, a definite/specific direct object takes the accusative. The sentence refers to specific printouts, so you see -ı.
Yes, -ları can also be “their X” (3rd person plural possessive), but without a possessor like onların, the default read here is “the printouts” (definite object).

How can I tell whether çıktıları means “the printouts” or “their printouts”?

Context. If a possessor is stated (e.g., onların çıktıları “their printouts”), it’s possessive.
If no possessor is present and the word is functioning as a direct object before a verb, it’s typically plural + accusative (“the printouts”).
You can also test by removing plural/accusative: indefinite object “printouts” would be just çıktılar (no -ı). Accusative marking pushes the “definite object” reading.

Why is it bekleme odasına and not bekleme odasında?

-a/-e (dative) = “to/into.” -da/-de (locative) = “in/at.”
With verbs like koymak (“to put”), you mark the destination with the dative: odaya/odasına “into the room.”
So bekleme odasına = “into the waiting room,” which fits “putting (something) into” somewhere.

What’s the structure of bekleme odası?

It’s a noun compound: bekle-me (verbal noun “waiting”) + oda (room) + 3rd person possessive -sı → “room of waiting” = “waiting room.”
Then you add the case: odası + na (buffer -n- after 3rd person possessive) → odasına (“to the waiting room”).
Note: The -me here is a nominalizer (not negation).

Why is it insanlara with the dative? English just says “saved people time.”

Turkish marks the beneficiary/indirect object with the dative -a/-e: insanlara = “to/for people.”
The pattern with kazandırmak is “X’e Y kazandırmak” = “to make X gain Y,” i.e., “to save X Y (time/money/etc.).”
You could also say insanlar için (“for people”), but with kazandırmak, the dative indirect object is the most natural.

What exactly is going on morphologically in kazandırdık?

kazan- (to gain) + causative -dır (“make s.o. gain”) → kazandır-.
- past -dı → kazandırdı- (made [someone] gain).
- 1st person plural -k → kazandırdık (“we made [them] gain” → “we saved [them]”).
So the subject “we” is encoded by -k; no separate “biz” is required.

Why is zaman unmarked (no accusative) after kazandırdık?

In “X’e Y kazandırmak,” Y (the thing gained) is typically an indefinite direct object, so it’s left unmarked: zaman (time), iki saat (two hours), para (money).
If you made it definite/specific, you could mark it, but with abstract or quantity-like complements it usually stays bare.

Could I replace koyarak with koyup or koyunca?

koyarak = “by putting,” emphasizes means/manner leading to the result.
koyup (with -ıp/-ip/-up/-üp) = “put and then…,” a loose sequence, not necessarily causal.
koyunca (with -ınca/-ince) = “when (we) put,” a temporal relation.
All can be grammatical, but -arak best captures the idea of “we saved time by putting …”

Can I move parts of the sentence around?

Yes, Turkish word order is flexible, though the -arak clause usually precedes the main clause.
Acceptable variants:
- Bekleme odasına çıktıları koyarak insanlara zaman kazandırdık.
- With a pause/comma: Çıktıları bekleme odasına koyarak, insanlara zaman kazandırdık.
- Postposing for emphasis is possible but less neutral: İnsanlara zaman kazandırdık, çıktıları bekleme odasına koyarak.

Is a comma after the -arak clause necessary?

Optional. Many writers add a comma to mark the adverbial clause: … koyarak, insanlara …
Without a comma is also common in short, clear sentences like this one.

Does -arak require the same subject in both parts?

Yes. The understood subject of koyarak is the same as the main clause subject (“we” here).
If subjects differ, use other structures:
- Onlar çıktıları … koyunca, biz insanlara … kazandırdık. (“When they put …, we saved …”)
- Or a finite subordinate clause.

Are there good synonyms here?

koymak alternatives: bırakmak (leave), yerleştirmek (place, arrange), konumlandırmak (position).
zaman kazandırmak alternatives: vakit kazandırmak (using “vakit”), zamandan tasarruf ettirmek (make [someone] save time), zaman kazancı sağlamak (provide time gain).
bekleme odası alternative: bekleme salonu (larger, lobby-like).

Could this be said in the passive to de-emphasize the agent?

Isn’t çıktı also a past tense verb form? How do I avoid confusion?

çıktı can be “(he/she/it) went out/came out” (3rd person simple past of çıkmak) or the noun “output/printout.”
Context and morphology tell you which it is. Here, plural + accusative -ları and being the object of koyarak clearly signal the noun meaning.

What’s with the buffer consonants like the -n- in odasına?

After 3rd person possessive -sı/-si, case endings attach with buffer -n-: oda-sı-na, oda-sı-nı, oda-sı-nda, oda-sı-ndan.
After bare nouns (no possessive), the dative uses buffer -y- if needed: oda-ya, ev-e (no buffer needed when there’s no vowel clash).