Learn Turkish: Bu lig daha kolay olsaydı, her maçı kazanırdık. - If this league had been easier, we would have won every match.

It combines the verb root ol- (to be) with the conditional suffix -sa and the past tense suffix -dı. Together, -saydı creates a past counterfactual meaning: 'if it had been.' It describes a condition in the past that didn't actually happen.

Why is the aorist tense used in kazanırdık if we are talking about the past ('would have won')?

To express 'would have' in the result part of a conditional sentence, Turkish combines the aorist tense (the -ır part) with the past tense (the -dı part). So, kazan (win) + -ır + -dı + -k (we) creates 'we would have won'. While this combination can also mean 'we used to win' in other contexts, the -saydı in the first clause triggers the conditional result.

Why does maç have the accusative ending -ı in her maçı?

The accusative case marks a specific direct object. In Turkish, using the word her (every) before a noun makes it specific. Since the matches are specific and are the direct object of the verb 'to win', maç must take the accusative suffix -ı.

Why doesn't the ç in maç change to a c when adding the vowel -ı?