Learn Turkish: Dün masaya vernik sürmüştü. - He had applied varnish to the table yesterday.

sürmek is a very versatile verb. When used with a physical substance (like vernik, paint, or cream) and a destination in the dative case (like masaya - to the table), it translates to 'to spread', 'to rub', or 'to apply'.

Why is vernik used in its bare form instead of taking the accusative case (like verniği)?

Here, vernik is an indefinite, generic direct object. The sentence means he applied 'varnish' in general, not a specific, previously mentioned bottle of varnish. In Turkish, non-specific direct objects don't take the accusative case and usually sit directly in front of the verb.

Since the action happened dün (yesterday), why use the past perfect sürmüştü instead of the simple past sürdü?

While sürdü ('he applied') would be grammatically fine, the past perfect sürmüştü ('he had applied') emphasizes that this action was fully completed before another event in the past. The speaker is likely setting up background context, such as 'He had applied varnish yesterday... so the table was still wet when I touched it today.'

How would we change this sentence to mean 'If he applied varnish yesterday...' using the conditional grammar from this lesson?