The aim of this study is to examine causative subordinating complex sentences in Turkish, which show the causal relationship between two events, in terms of structural and semantic relations, and to reveal the similarities and differences of the causative subordinating sentences included in the study. It is aimed to contribute to the description of Turkish by revealing the semantic and functional differences between causative structures that show the same or similar relationships. The study deals with complex sentences containing adverbial subordinate clauses formed with causative subordinators. In these complex sentences, only the second part (main clause) of the sentence has been examined. Within the limited scope of the study, causative subordinators are restricted to sentences with the compound subordinator endings -(y)AcAğI için and -(y)AcAğIndAn. Examining the similar and different aspects of these two structures, which are described as co-functional in the sources, is the main purpose of the study. The study is distinguished from other studies in terms of being corpus-based, evaluating causality through subordinators, and offering a quantitative analysis of these two subordinator structures in many aspects. For each of the subordinators to be examined, 200 sentences containing the relevant structures were randomly sampled from the Boğaziçi University Corpus (BoUn Corpus), and these sentences were marked based on the four scales created by Spooren et al. (2010) regarding subjectivity and causality relationships. To enrich the data, markers such as plurality, voice, polarity, ability, tense, modality and copula -DIr in the main clause predicate and the related statistics were also identified and included in the analysis. In conclusion, it has been observed that the subordinator ending -(y)AcAğIndAn is used in more objective expressions. This objectivity is supported by the use of passive voice, copula and the simple present tense. On the other hand, it has been found that the subordinator ending -(y)AcAğI için is preferred in more subjective expressions. This subjectivity is associated with explicit and implicit references, active voice, positive and sufficiency markers.

Converbs, subordinator suffixes, gerund phrases, subjectivity, objectivity, causality.