Yüklem-nesne ilişkisini gösteren geçişsizlik-geçişlilik, eylemde doğuştan var olan nitelikler olduğundan sözlüksel bir ayrım olarak ele alınmalıdır. Eylemin yaptığı işten etkilenen dil birimleri, sadece {-I} /{-Ø} ekleriyle kullanıma çıkmadığı gibi {-I} / {-Ø} ekleriyle çekimlenen her ad ya da zamir de işten etkileneni göstermez. Geçişlilikten söz edebilmek için nesnenin yüzey yapıda bulunması, zorunlu değildir. Geçişli bir eylem de işten etkilenenin metin dışında tutulmasını gerektirebilir. Buna eylemin aldığı çatı ekleri yol açar. {-l}, {-n}, {-ş} ekleri, getirildikleri eylemde (işteş-geçişi, dönüşlü-geçişli) hareketten etkileneni metin dışında tutma, belirsizleştirme işlevini üstlenirler. Özne-yüklem ilişkilerini düzenleyen {-t}, {-r}, {-DIr} eklerine geçişlilik eki demek doğru değildir çünkü bu ekler, cümlede yaptıranın yanı sıra bir de yapanın olmasını kaçınılmaz kılar. Anlam bilimsel roller, bir eylemi ya da yüklemi üyelerine bağlayan anlamsal ilişkilerdir. Eylem anlamından türeyen anlam bilimsel roller, katılanların yüklendiği anlamsal işlevleri ifade eder. Dolayısıyla yüklem denetimindeki cümleye hangi ögenin hangi eklerle gireceği anlambilimsel, sözdizimsel ve edmbilimsel kurallarla belirlenir. Durum kuramının baskın olduğu Türkçede, kurgu farklılaşsa da dizgedeki bir dilbiriminin öge olarak hangi dilbilgisel rolü üstlendiği durum ekleri aracılığıyla belirlenebilir. Eylemden etkileneni gösteren dilbirimine de tüm ögeler gibi durum ekleriyle nesne görevi yüklenir. Eylemin yaptığı işten etkilenen konumundaki dil biriminin hangi durum ekini aldığı önemli olmamalı. Nesne, geleneksel dilbilgisinin alışık olduğu durum belirticilerinin dışında başka durum belirticileriyle de kodlanabilir. Hangi ad işletme ekiyle çekimlenirse çekimlensin işten etkilenen yani nesne alan eylemler geçişli sayılmalı. {-DAn}, {-A}, {-DA}, {-lA} eklerini alan adlar / zamirler nesne görevini üstlendiklerinde bunları alan eylemler geçişli sayılmalıdır

Transivity - intransivity showing the predicate-object relations, should be taken as a lexical distinction because the existing innate qualities in verb. Language units that are affected by the action done by verb, neither just used with {-I}/{-Ø} suffixes nor show every noun and pronoun conjugated with {-I}/{-Ø} suffixes affected by action. The surface structure of the object is not required to mention from transivity. Transitive verb also necessitates the exclusion of text of unit affected by the action. Voice suffixes taken by verb lead to this. {-l}, {-n}, {-ş} suffixes undertake the function of obscuring and excluding text to unit affected by the action. To call as transitive suffixes to {-t}, {-r}, {-DIr} suffixes organizing subject-predicate relation is not true, because this suffixes require existing both causer and doer in sentence. Semantic roles are semantic relations linking their members to a predicate or verb. Semantic roles derived from verb meaning, express semantic function the participants are installed. Therefore, into sentence in control of predicate which that element which will come with suffixes is determined by semantic, syntactic and pragmatic rules. In Turkish is that dominant theory of the case, even though the different construct, which undertaken grammatical role element as that a language unit in system, determined through case suffixes. It is undertaken the object task with case suffixes to also language unit showing element affected by verb, like all elements. It should not matter, which received case suffixes of language units that are affected by the action done by verb. Object is also coded other case indices expect common case indices of traditional grammar. Verbs affected by action / received object, should be considered transitive whichever conjugate by noun conjugation suffixes. Verbs received these suffixes, should be transitive when nouns /pronouns received {-DAn}, {-A}, {-DA}, {-lA} suffixes undertake the object task Transivity-intransivity showing the predicate-object relations, should be taken as a lexical distinction because the existing innate qualities in verb. Language units that are affected by the action done by verb, neither just used with {-I}/{-Ø} suffixes nor show every noun and pronoun conjugated with {-I}/{-Ø} suffixes affected by action. The surface structure of the object is not required to mention from transivity. Transitive verb also necessitates the exclusion of text of unit affected by the action. Voice suffixes taken by verb lead to this. {-l}, {-n}, {-ş} suffixes undertake the function of obscuring and excluding text to unit affected by the action. To call as transitive suffixes to {-t}, {-r}, {-DIr} suffixes organizing subject-predicate relation is not true, because this suffixes require existing both causer and doer in sentence. Semantic roles are semantic relations linking their members to a predicate or verb. Semantic roles derived from verb meaning, express semantic function the participants are installed. Therefore, into sentence in control of predicate which that element which will come with suffixes is determined by semantic, syntactic and pragmatic rules. In Turkish is that dominant theory of the case, even though the different construct, which undertaken grammatical role element as that a language unit in system, determined through case suffixes. It is undertaken the object task with case suffixes to also language unit showing element affected by verb, like all elements. However, every noun or pronoun conjugated {-I}, {-Ø} suffixes is not an object. Because verbs of process are intransitive, they are not take object, as in “Food cooked.” example. In order to entrance sentence noun or pronoun conjugated {-I}, {-Ø} suffixes, verb must take {-r} suffix: Yasemin, yemek-i piş-ir-di. / Yasemin, yemek-Ø piş-ir-di. Because traditional grammar accepted transitive verbs of process taking {-t}, {-r}, {-DIr} suffixes, as verbs of action, it accept object yemek-i / yemek-Ø element in the example above sentence. However, the language unit cannot take on object task since it is not show affected element by verb. Transitive verb cannot convert to intransitive verb so intransitive verb cannot convert to transitive verb; it cannot be undertaken transitivity and intransitivity characteristics to a verb through suffixes since there is no structural characteristics. When piş- verb of process take the form of piş-ir-, it maintains transitive its characteristics. Here language unit identified as objects of traditional grammar actually takes on subject task for pointed who performing action: Yasemin pişirdi, yemek pişti. These can be separated into primary subject (Yasemin) and secondary subject (yemek) terms. It should not matter, which take case suffixes of language units that are affected by the action done by verb. Object is also coded other case indices expect common case indices of traditional grammar. In “İpek, eline krem-Ø sürdü. / İpek, krem-i eline sürdü.” examples, krem-Ø /krem-i structures is accepted as an object. However both krem and el is getting affected from sürmek verb. It is not true to not show this as affected element merely because it takes suffix. In “Teyzem börek-ten verdi. / Teyzem börek-Ø verdi. / Teyzem börek-i verdi.” examples, börek conjugated with three different suffixes ({-DAn}, {-Ø}, {-I}) is affected element by verb despite minor semantic differences between them. Teyzem börek-Ø verdi. Here, generally it is mentioned from whichever pie. It can be a known and defined by transmitter pie but pie is not defined by receiver. Teyzem börek-i verdi. Even not give its characteristics, here it is mentioned from a pie defined by both transmitter and receiver. Teyzem börek-ten verdi. Here pie is defined by both transmitter and receiver but the main outstanding is the wholepart relationship. It is given a piece of pie. Despite not receiving plural suffix, börek-ten shows the whole. The part is in deeply structure. In the example {-DAn} suffix is genitive case suffix linking noun to noun and, the expansion of lexical phrase is “börek-ten börek”. When determination drops, börek-ten undertake the function of “börekten börek” phrase its structure. Ultimately, even the ellipses structure, börekten undertake on object task by oneself. Nevertheless here it is not true to say the object case suffix to {-DAn} suffix. As noted above, {-DAn} suffix is genitive case suffix linking noun to noun. “Teyzem börek-ten börek-Ø verdi.” Also the object case suffix, as shown, is in ellipsis. It may be concluded as follows: 1. Transivity-intransivity showing the predicate-object relations is not structural characteristic. These are congenital characteristics of verb as activity. Therefore it should only be handled as conceptual, lexical distinction. 2. It is not mandatory that the surface structure of the object has to be able to mention transitivity, in other words, the object concretely take place in sentence. The carriers of content understood from the context or known can remain out-of-text. The language can allow the reduction of the language units with aesthetic concerns, on behalf of saving time and labor. In other words, language can prevent the output of their surface structure. If so, the verb is transitive, the absence of object in its founded sentence is not able to return its transitivity to intransitivity. It may require that transitive verb also exclude text the affected element by action. Voice suffixes of the verb lead to this situation. 3. To say transitivity suffixes to {-t}, {-r}, {-DIr} suffixes is not true, because these suffixes organize the subject-object relationship. They mandatorily want causer in addition to doer. There are no predicateobject relationships of these suffixes. It’s out of the question that intransitive verb is transitive by taking these suffixes. 4. Every noun or pronoun conjugated {-I}, {-Ø} suffixes don’t show affected by action. In sentences forming intransitive-factitive verbs, elements taking mentioned suffixes are doing the action. 5. Language units affected by action done in verb only are not seen in usage area with {-I} / {-Ø} suffixes. Language units affected by action can be shown with other cause suffixes. 6. If we say that affected element by action done in verb is “object”, it may not be important taking whichever cause suffix in the object position. In this case, affected element by action, namely verbs taking object, regardless should be considered transitive. Then, noun / pronoun taking {-DAn}, {-A}, {-DA}, {-lA} suffixes, providing that showing affected element by action, can take on object task and, verbs taking these suffixes may be transitive. 7. It can be said that “objects” forming the affected connection with verb by {-I} / {-Ø} suffixes are “primary subject”, “objects” forming the affected connection with verb by {-DAn}, {-A}, {-DA}, {-lA} suffixes are “secondary subject”.