Yazının başlangıç bölümünde, Türk dil bilgisi terimi olarak “belirtme öbeği”nin hangi anlamda kullanıldığı belirleniyor. Türkçedeki belirtme öbeklerinin genellikle tek varlığın ya da kavramın karşılığı oldukları, bir sözcükten daha belirgin ve zengin anlamlara sahip oldukları, metin çözümlerinde tek öğe olarak gösterildikleri vurgulanıyor. Dil bilgisi ve söz dizimi kaynaklarında bu konu işlenirken, “öbek (grup)” ve “takım (tamlama)” terimlerinin sık kullanıldıkları belirtiliyor. “Öbek (grup)” başlığı altında; bazı dil bilgisi kitaplarında “öbek (grup)” teriminin hiç tanımlanmadığı, bazı dil bilgisi kaynaklarında ise öbeklerin “bir belirtenle bir belirtilen öğeden oluştukları” nın söylendiği, kaynak adları da verilerek saptanıyor. Bütün belirtme öbeklerinin “belirten / belirtilen” öğelerinin bulunmadığı vurgulanarak bu kaynaklar eleştiriliyor.

Abstract In introduction, in what sense “wordgroup” has been used in Turkish grammar is explained. It is emphasized that Turkish wordgroups, having more prominent and rich meanings than a lexeme, are the correspondents of a single existence or a concept, and that they are displayed as a single unit in textual analyses. It is pointed out that the terms “group” or “set (construction)” has extensively been used in grammar and syntax sources when dealing with that matter. Under the heading “Group”, it is ascertained with referring to the sources that the term “group” has not even been defined in some grammar sources, while it is observed in some that they are composed of “a marker and a marked”. Those sources are criticized by remarking that not all wordgroups include a marker/a marked. Following this, with quotations, how the term “group” is defined in four of the published grammar terms dictionary and in Turkish Dictionary by Institution of Turkish Language. They are criticized, by pointing out that they have three deficiencies in common: 1. Confusion in terms “compound word” and “wordgroup”, 2. Ignoring the orthographic rules of wordgroups, 3. Assuming that the term “group” has been used to donate a single meaning. The broad and narrow meanings of those groups are defined, by remarking that the term “group” is used with a “narrow” meaning as well as with a “broad” meaning. With such an explanation, it seems that the confusion in terms “compound word” and “wordgroup” in terms of their meanings has been dealt with. Furthermore, this leads to the fact that the terms “group” and “set (construction)” may be separated. Under the heading “Set (construction)”, it is asserted that the scope of this term has not been determined and defined yet in the analyzed grammar books. How the term “construction” has been defined in the referred grammar terms dictionary, and Instituion of Turkish Language Turkish Dictonary is stated with quotations. Following this, the other significant features of sets in Turkish are noted, after emphasizing that a sufficient definition of “Set (construction)” cannot be presented by stating only that it is composed of two units, one of which is marker (determinative), and the other is marked (determined). The name of the most comprehensive study about the problem, the PhD dissertation ‘Türk Dilinde İzafet” by S. S. Mayzel, is presented. The definitons and approaches to this term are mentioned in this study, the broad abstract of which was published in TDAY Belleten 1958, the publication of Institution of Turkish Language. Afterwards, it is explained that there are to types of sets (constructions) mentioned in Turkish grammar sources: 1. Noun set, 2. Adjective set. Under the heading “Genitive Set”, the approach “sets the marking unit of which is composed of personal pronouns” by S. S. Mayzel, and the grammar books analyzed throughout the process of this study are summarized. It is suggested that those sets, constructed on the basis of the “genitive relationship”, and with all its aspects bearing the features of the other sets, be referred to as “genitive set” by counting them a third type of set. It is put forward that the marker units of aforementioned sets are composed of personal pronouns, while the markers of noun sets are composed of nouns. It is as well proposed that the marker units of noun sets are the nouns functioning or counted as third person, while the the marker units of “genitive sets” are the pronouns correspondent to Turkish six persons. As a consequence of those differences, it is stressed in the study that if those sets are referred to as “genitive set”, then the number of the sets in Turkish rose to three. Under the heading “Adverbial Set (adverbial construction)”, the way the adverbial sets (adverbial groups) are dealt with and the efficiency in dealing with those sets are evaluated, by quoting with this aim. The examples in such