Learn Hardcore Turkish: Yoldayken sana mesaj atmam; müsait olunca ararım. - While I am on the road, I don’t text you; I call when I’m available.

yol (road/way) + -da (locative “on/at”) + -yken (“while”) → yolda-yken = “while on the way.” The -y- is a buffer consonant used before -ken when the preceding part ends in a vowel.

Examples:

evdeyken = while at home (ev-de-yken)
dersteyken = while in class (ders-te-yken)
After a consonant, no buffer y: çocukken = when (I was) a child

Why do we need the locative -da in yoldayken? Could I say yolken?

No. Yol is just “road.” To mean “while on the road/on the way,” Turkish uses the locative: yolda. Then you add -yken → yoldayken. Without -da, yolken sounds ungrammatical.

Why is there a y in yoldayken?

It’s a buffer consonant. The “while” morpheme is -ken, but after a vowel you insert -y-: vowel + -yken. After a consonant, it’s just -ken (e.g., çocukken).

What tense/mood is atmam in sana mesaj atmam?

It’s the negative aorist: “I don’t / won’t (as a rule or decision) send.” Morphology: at-ma-m (send-NEG-1SG.AOR). In 1st person singular, the negative aorist is -mam/-mem (not “-mazım”). The affirmative aorist would be atarım (“I send / I’ll send”).

Why choose atmam instead of atmayacağım?

atmam (negative aorist) = a rule, policy, or firm decision (“I don’t / I won’t do that”).
atmayacağım (negative future) = a specific future plan/commitment (“I’m not going to text”). Here it reads like a general rule while traveling, so atmam fits well.

What exactly does mesaj atmak mean? Is it colloquial?

Yes—literally “to throw a message,” but idiomatically “to send a text/message.” It’s informal and very common in speech. More neutral/formal is mesaj göndermek. For back-and-forth texting, mesajlaşmak is used.

Why is it sana and not seni?

Because the message is sent “to you” (indirect object). sana is dative (“to you”). seni (accusative) marks a direct object, e.g., seni ararım (“I’ll call you”).

Do I have to say seni ararım, or is ararım enough?

In context, ararım is enough and commonly used; “I’ll call” is understood as “I’ll call you.” Adding seni just makes “you” explicit or emphasized: Seni ararım.

How is ararım expressing the future here?

It’s the aorist used for promises/intentions and scheduled actions: ararım = “I’ll call.” The dedicated future arayacağım also works, but:

ararım = concise promise/plan, a bit more matter-of-fact.
arayacağım = specific future intention, sometimes more emphatic or time-bound.

What does müsait olunca mean, and who is the subject?

It’s “when (someone) is/becomes available.” -ınca/-ince forms a time clause (a converb) and doesn’t take personal endings. By default, its subject is the same as the main clause’s subject. So here it naturally reads as “when I’m free, I’ll call.” To make “you” the subject, say sen müsait olunca or müsait olduğunda.

Could I use müsaitken instead of müsait olunca?

They’re different:

müsaitken = while being available (overlapping time).
müsait olunca = when/once (I) become available (event boundary). For “I’ll call once I’m free,” müsait olunca is the natural choice.

Is the semicolon required? Could I use a comma or a connector?

In writing, a semicolon neatly separates two related statements. You could also write:

Yoldayken sana mesaj atmam, müsait olunca ararım.
Yoldayken sana mesaj atmam. Müsait olunca ararım.
Or add a connector: Yoldayken sana mesaj atmam; bunun yerine, müsait olunca ararım.

Can I change the word order, like Sana yoldayken mesaj atmam?

Yes, Turkish word order is flexible for emphasis. Common, neutral flow is time/place → indirect object → direct object → verb:

Yoldayken sana mesaj atmam (neutral).
Sana yoldayken mesaj atmam (slight emphasis on “to you”).
Yoldayken mesaj sana atmam is possible but marked; it emphasizes “to you.”

How would I make the subject of “when available” explicit?

“When I’m available”: Ben müsait olunca ararım / Müsait olduğumda ararım.
“When you’re available”: Sen müsait olunca ararım / Müsait olduğunda ararım.
Polite “you”: Siz müsait olunca ararım / Müsait olduğunuzda ararım.

What’s the difference between atmam and atamam?

atmam = “I don’t/I won’t send (by choice/policy).”
atamam = “I can’t send (I’m unable/not allowed).” So Yoldayken sana mesaj atamam emphasizes inability; atmam emphasizes a rule/decision.

Is yolda iken also correct?

Yes; iken can be separate in a more formal style: yolda iken = yoldayken. The fused form is more common in everyday writing.

Why is there no accusative on mesaj?

Because it’s indefinite (“a message”), so no -ı/‑i/‑u/‑ü. If it’s specific/definite, add the accusative: Sana o mesajı atmam (“I won’t send you that message”).