Learn Hardcore Turkish: Adam tırnak makasını paylaşınca çocuk nazikçe teşekkür etti. - When the man shared the nail clipper, the child thanked him politely.

paylaş-ınca = when (he) shared / once (he) shared It doesn’t itself mark tense; the time is read from the main verb (etti = past), so the whole sentence is about a past event. The suffix follows 4-way vowel harmony: -ınca/-ince/-unca/-ünce. Since the last vowel in paylaş- is back (a), it becomes -ınca: paylaşınca.

Why is it tırnak makasını (with -nı) and not just tırnak makası?

tırnak makası is a fixed noun compound meaning nail clipper (literally “nail scissor/clipper”). The second noun carries a 3sg possessive-like ending (-sı) that’s part of the compound pattern; it doesn’t imply real possession here.
When that compound is a specific/definite direct object, Turkish marks it with the accusative: -ı/ -i/ -u/ -ü. Because makası ends in a vowel, you add a buffer -n before the accusative: makası + n + ı → makasını. So tırnak makasını signals a definite object: “the nail clipper.”

Does makasını mean “his nail clipper”?

Not necessarily. In the compound tırnak makası, the -sı is part of the lexicalized compound, not a real possessor. If you want to say “the man’s nail clipper,” you would say adamın tırnak makası. To emphasize “his own,” you can say kendi tırnak makasını. In the given sentence, tırnak makasını most naturally means “the nail clipper (in question).”

Why isn’t there a pronoun like o (“he”)? Who’s doing what?

Turkish is pro-drop: subject pronouns are usually omitted because the context and verb form make the subject clear. Here:

Subordinate clause subject: Adam (the man).
Main clause subject: çocuk (the child). No extra o is needed; adding o would sound emphatic or redundant.

Can I put the time clause after the main clause?

Yes. Both orders are possible:

Adam tırnak makasını paylaşınca, çocuk nazikçe teşekkür etti. (common and natural)
Çocuk nazikçe teşekkür etti, adam tırnak makasını paylaşınca. (also possible; the comma helps) Putting the -ınca clause first is a common way to set the scene. In writing, a comma after the -ınca clause is customary.

What’s the difference between -ınca, -ken, and -dığında for “when”?

-ınca/-ince: “when/once/after,” often suggests a completed trigger event before the main event. Neutral for tense; context supplies it. Example: Paylaşınca teşekkür etti = “Once he shared, he thanked.”
-ken: “while,” for simultaneity/overlap. Example: Paylaşırken teşekkür etti = “He thanked while sharing” (odd here pragmatically).
-dığında/-diğinde: “when/whenever,” more nominalized and “anchored” in time. If you state the subject of this clause, it normally takes GENITIVE: Adamın paylaş(tığ)ında … In everyday speech you may hear nominative subjects, but genitive is the standard.

Why is it teşekkür etti and not a single verb like “thanked”?

Turkish uses the light-verb construction teşekkür etmek (“to thank,” literally “do thanks”). In the past, it’s teşekkür etti. Present habitual is teşekkür eder, and so on. This is a very common pattern in Turkish (noun + etmek).

Why is etti spelled with double t?

Because of a regular phonological process with etmek. The past suffix -di combines with et- and produces etti (not “etdi”). Similarly: etmedi (negative past), eder (present), ettik, etc.

Where does the adverb nazikçe go? Is teşekkür etti nazikçe okay?

Adverbs normally come before the verb phrase, so nazikçe teşekkür etti is the default and most natural. Teşekkür etti nazikçe is possible but sounds less neutral and can feel afterthought-like or poetic. You can also say kibarca or the more wordy nazik bir şekilde.

Why isn’t it adama teşekkür etti? Don’t you “thank someone”?

You can include the addressee with the dative:

Çocuk adama nazikçe teşekkür etti. = “The child thanked the man politely.” In the given sentence, it’s obvious who is being thanked, so Turkish omits it. But if there’s any ambiguity, add the dative object (ona / adama). Note: with teşekkür etmek, the person thanked is in the dative; not accusative.

Does -ınca always mean “after,” or can it be general/habitual?

It can do both, depending on the main verb:

Specific past: Adam ... paylaşınca çocuk ... etti = “When he shared, the child thanked.”
Habitual/generic: Adam ... paylaşınca çocuk ... eder = “Whenever he shares, the child thanks.” The tense/aspect of the main clause guides the reading.

Could I use -dığında instead here? How would the subject be marked?

Yes, but then, if you state the subject of the subordinate clause, standard grammar marks it in the genitive:

Adamın tırnak makasını paylaştığında, çocuk nazikçe teşekkür etti. Colloquially some speakers drop the genitive, but adamın is the textbook form.

Is there any punctuation I should be careful about?

When the -ınca clause comes first, a comma after it is customary in writing: Adam tırnak makasını paylaşınca, çocuk nazikçe teşekkür etti. If the -ınca clause comes after the main clause, a comma before it helps readability.

What if I want to say “The child thanked him for sharing”?

Use için with a nominalized verb:

Paylaştığı için ona nazikçe teşekkür etti. Here paylaştığı is a verbal noun (“his sharing”), için = “for/because of,” and ona is the dative addressee.

Is there any ambiguity about whose clipper it was?

Grammatically, yes: tırnak makasını doesn’t specify ownership; it’s just “the (specific) nail clipper.” If you need to be explicit:

“the man’s clipper”: adamın tırnak makası
“his own clipper”: kendi tırnak makasını
“the child’s clipper”: çocuğun tırnak makası