Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.

I also understand what you want to say.

Breakdown of Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.

• ben: I
• istemek: to want
• de: also
• senin: your
• anlamak: to understand
• ne: what
• söylemek: to say

Questions & Answers about Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.

What does de mean in Ben de, and why is it separate?

In this sentence, de means “also / too”.

• Ben de = “I also / I too”.
• de is a little enclitic particle, always written separately from the word before it.
• It is not the same as the case ending -de / -da (“in / at / on”), which is attached to the word:
  
  • evde = “in the house” (one word, suffix)
  • Ben de = “I too” (two words, separate particle)

So Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum = “I also understand what you want to say.”

Can I write Bende senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum as one word?

No. Bende as one word means “on me / at me / with me” (person + locative suffix).

• bende = ben (I) + -de (locative “in / at / on”) → “on/at me”
  • Example: Para bende. = “The money is with me.”

In your sentence you want “I also”, not “on me”, so it must be:

• Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum. ✅
• Bende senin… ❌ (wrong meaning and wrong form here)

What is the structure of senin ne söylemek istediğini?

This whole chunk is a noun clause acting as the object of anlıyorum (“I understand”).

Breakdown:

• senin = “your / of you” (you-GENITIVE)
• ne = “what”
• söylemek = “to say” (infinitive)
• istediğini = “that you want (it)” / “your wanting (it)”

Now istediğini itself is:

• iste- = verb stem “to want”
• -dik = nominalizing/participle suffix, here in the form -diğ- because of sound changes
• -in = 2nd person singular possessive (“your”)
• -i = accusative case (“(the) … as an object”)

So:

• iste-diğ-in-i → istediğini = “the thing that you want / your wanting (it)”

Putting it together:

• senin ne söylemek istediğini ≈ “the thing that you want to say / what you want to say”

This entire noun phrase is what you “understand”:

(Ben de) [senin ne söylemek istediğini] anlıyorum.
“I also understand [what you want to say].”

Why do we use senin (genitive) here instead of just sen?

Because in Turkish, when you turn a whole clause into a noun phrase (to use it as an object, like “what you want to say”), the subject of that embedded clause normally appears in the genitive case.

• Direct sentence: Sen ne söylemek istiyorsun?
  “What do you want to say?”
• Embedded clause: Senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.
  “I understand what you want to say.”

In the embedded form:

• sen → senin (you-GENITIVE)
• the verb istiyorsun becomes the nominalized form istediğin(i)

This genitive + possessive pattern is very regular in Turkish for noun clauses:

• Senin geldiğini biliyorum.
  “I know that you are coming.”
• Onun gittiğini duydum.
  “I heard that he/she left.”

Is senin actually required, or could I just say Ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum?

You can omit senin if the subject is clear from context, because the possessive ending already tells you the person:

• istediğini → contains -in (2nd person singular “your”)

So both are grammatical:

• Ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum. ✅
• Senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum. ✅

Adding senin usually gives extra emphasis on “you”:

• With senin: “I understand what you want to say (as opposed to others).”
• Without senin: more neutral “I understand what you want to say.”

Why is it istediğini and not istiyorsun?

Because here we need a noun-like form of the verb “to want”, not a normal finite verb form.

• istiyorsun = “you want” (main verb; cannot take case endings like -i directly)
• istediğin = “(the thing) that you want / your wanting” (nominalized form)

To use the whole idea “what you want to say” as the object of anlıyorum, Turkish makes the “want” part into a nominalized verb phrase with -dik + possessive:

• ne söylemek istiyorsun? → direct question
• ne söylemek istediğin(i) → “what you want to say” (a noun clause)

English keeps “want” as a normal verb (“I understand what you want to say”), but Turkish turns it into something noun-like so it can behave like a single object.

How is istediğini formed exactly, and what is that ğ doing there?

Formally, it’s:

• iste- (want)
• • -dik (nominalizing / participle suffix)
• • -in (2nd person singular possessive “your”)
• • -i (accusative case)

Due to sound rules:

1. The suffix -dik changes by vowel harmony:
   • after front vowels (e, i, ö, ü) → -dik / -diğ-
   • after back vowels (a, ı, o, u) → -dık / -duğ-, etc.
2. The final k of -dik becomes ğ between vowels:
   • iste-dik-in → spoken more like iste-diğ-in

Then you add the accusative -i:

• iste-diğ-in-i → istediğini

So:

• istediğin = “what you want / your wanting”
• istediğini = “what you want” as a definite object (accusative)

Why does istediğini end with -ni / -i? Is that accusative, and is it necessary?

Yes, the final -i (the last vowel) is the accusative case marker, and the n before it belongs to the possessive ending (-in).

• istediğin = “what you want / your wanting”
• istediğini = “what you want” as a specific object of another verb

In this sentence, the entire clause:

senin ne söylemek istediğini

is a definite thing that you understand, so Turkish normally marks it with accusative -i:

Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.

Omitting that -i here would sound strange or incorrect to most native speakers. For this common pattern (“X’in ne demek / söylemek istediğini anlıyorum”), you should treat the -i as required.

Why is the word order Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum? Could we move things around?

Turkish is basically SOV (Subject–Object–Verb):

• Subject: Ben de (“I also”)
• Object: senin ne söylemek istediğini (“what you want to say”)
• Verb: anlıyorum (“I understand”)

So the standard order is:

[Ben de] [senin ne söylemek istediğini] [anlıyorum].

You can move the pieces for emphasis, as long as the verb tends to stay at or near the end:

• Senin ne söylemek istediğini ben de anlıyorum.
  (Emphasis a bit more on “I, too, understand what you want to say”.)
• Ben senin ne söylemek istediğini de anlıyorum.
  (Here de attaches to the clause, “I understand that too (among other things)”.)

But anlıyorum almost always stays at the end in neutral word order.

Why is it anlıyorum (present continuous) and not something like a simple present form?

In Turkish, the -yor form (anlıyorum) is used for most present-time situations, including mental states:

• anlıyorum = literally “I am understanding”, but usually translated as “I understand” in English.

The Turkish “-r” simple present (e.g. anlarım) is more for:

• habits, general truths, or
• sometimes a more firm, generic statement

Compare:

• Şu anda ne demek istediğini anlıyorum.
  “Right now, I understand what you mean.” (natural: anlıyorum)
• Genelde insanları iyi anlarım.
  “In general, I understand people well.” (habitual: anlarım)

So anlıyorum is the natural choice here to express current understanding.

Could I say Ben de anlıyorum without the long clause? What changes?

Yes:

• Ben de anlıyorum. = “I understand too.”

This is a shorter, more general statement. It doesn’t specify what you understand; that comes from context.

When you say the full sentence:

• Ben de senin ne söylemek istediğini anlıyorum.

you make explicit what you understand: “what you want to say.” Both are correct; the long version is just more specific.