Formal Directives and Institutional Obligation
C1
Authority
1. Function
The -acak/-ecek suffix, when used in institutional writing, does not project a future action. It announces a binding outcome that has already been authorized. The directive is not open to negotiation, scheduling, or reinterpretation.
Concrete contrast:
Personal command:
“Raporu hazırlayın.”
(Prepare the report.)
This allows response and negotiation:
“Yarın hazırlayabilir miyim?”
(Can I prepare it tomorrow?)
Institutional directive:
“Rapor hazırlanacaktır.”
(The report will be prepared.)
No response is required or expected. The decision exists independently of the reader. Their role is compliance, not deliberation. At this level, -acak functions as a seal of institutional will. It does not ask for action. It documents inevitability.
2. Forms
Institutional directives are built through passive framing and future sealing.
Core directive pattern:
Passive verb + -acak/-ecek (+ formal assertion when required)
Examples:
“Uygulanacaktır.”
“İptal edilecektir.”
“Kabul edilecektir.”
Third-person formal request pattern:
Passive nominalized verb + institutional request formula
Examples:
“Yapılması rica olunur.”
“Bilgilerin iletilmesi arz edilir.”
Each form removes the visible commander while preserving authority.
3. Morphology
A) Building the Directive Form
The directive is assembled through a fixed morphological sequence:
Base verb:
“uygula” (to apply)
Passivization:
“uygulan” (be applied)
Obligation sealing:
“uygulanacak” (will be applied)
Formal institutional assertion:
“uygulanacaktır” (it is institutionally established that it will be applied)
This sequence converts action into outcome.
B) Why -acak and Not Other Forms
“uygulanıyor”
Describes an ongoing process. No binding force.
“uygulandı”
Reports a completed action. No directive power.
“uygulanmalıdır”
States obligation explicitly. Sounds prescriptive and debatable.
“uygulanacaktır”
Frames the obligation as an inevitable consequence of prior authority. The decision is no longer visible, only its outcome.
C) Third-Person Request Construction
“yapılması rica olunur” is built as follows:
yap → yapıl (passive) → yapılma (verbal noun) → yapılması (possessive)
→ yapılması rica olunur
Each step removes agency:
Passive removes the executor.
Nominalization removes action force.
Third-person construction removes the commander.
The result is a request with distance, not softness.
4. Structural Guide
Institutional directives are assembled to eliminate interpretive space.
Core structure:
Subject (policy / regulation)
Temporal lock
Scope definition
Passive action
-acak obligation seal
(+ formal assertion if required)
This architecture ensures that by the end of the sentence, all operational questions are already answered.
5. Usage
Institutions deploy -acaktır and third-person requests to stabilize authority across domains.
Ministries:
“Yeni prosedür 1 Ocak’tan itibaren uygulanacaktır.”
Used when policy must appear as an extension of law rather than ministerial preference.
Legal decrees:
“İlgili madde iptal edilecektir.”
Used to close interpretive space and prevent alternative readings.
Board resolutions:
“Önerilen bütçe kabul edilecektir.”
Used to present outcomes as unanimous and finalized, even if internal debate existed.
Strategic deployment:
Use -acaktır when authority is unquestioned and compliance is assumed.
Use “rica olunur” when authority is formal but relational balance must be preserved.
Examples
A) Scale of Directiveness
“Uygulanması önerilir.”
Use when alignment is desired but optional.
“Uygulanması rica olunur.”
Use when requesting cooperation from institutional equals.
“Uygulanmalıdır.”
Use when obligation must be explicit.
“Uygulanacaktır.”
Use when the decision is sealed and no response is required.
B) Executive Masterpiece
“İlgili düzenleme, yürürlük tarihinden itibaren tüm birimlerde eksiksiz şekilde uygulanacaktır.”
Surgical deconstruction:
“İlgili düzenleme”
Defines the exact policy. No ambiguity.
“yürürlük tarihinden itibaren”
Temporal lock. No debate about timing.
“tüm birimlerde”
Scope maximization. No exceptions.
“eksiksiz şekilde”
Closes interpretive gaps.
“uygulan-”
Passive voice removes the executor. Responsibility is collective.
“-acak”
Obligation seal. The outcome is already decided.
“-tır”
Formal institutional certification.
Cumulative effect:
By the end of the sentence, the reader knows WHAT, WHEN, WHERE, HOW, and WHETHER.
There is zero space left for “Should we?” or “Can we delay?”
C) Negative Form
“Bu düzenleme uygulanmayacaktır.”
(The regulation will not be implemented.)
This announces institutional rejection, not temporary delay. The matter is closed.
D) Interrogative Form
“Yeni sistem uygulanacak mıdır?”
This form is rare. When used, it is rhetorical. The expected answer already exists.
Notes
Operational Boundaries
Authority dependency:
Central Bank:
“Faiz oranı %15’e yükseltilecektir.”
The market treats this as fact.
Junior department:
“Yeni sistem uygulanacaktır.”
May be ignored. The structure amplifies authority but cannot create it.
Cross-Domain Legitimacy
Same structure, different binding force:
Ministry:
“Yeni vergi sistemi uygulanacaktır.”
High legitimacy.
Corporation:
“Yeni çalışma sistemi uygulanacaktır.”
Medium legitimacy, depends on organizational culture.
NGO:
“Yeni üyelik kriterleri uygulanacaktır.”
Low legitimacy, members may resist or exit.
Final Boundary
The -acaktır directive is a tool of power, not persuasion.
It succeeds only where authority already exists.
Used without legitimacy, it risks sounding performative rather than binding.
Formal Directives and Institutional Obligation – FAQ (C1)
Q: What does –acak / –ecek express in institutional directives?
A: In institutional writing, –acak does not indicate future time. It seals a binding outcome that has already been authorized and is not open to negotiation.
Q: Why is passive voice used in institutional directives like “uygulanacaktır”?
A: Passive voice removes the visible decision-maker while preserving authority. The focus shifts from who orders the action to the inevitability of the outcome.
Q: How is “uygulanacaktır” different from “uygulanmalıdır”?
A: “Uygulanmalıdır” states explicit obligation and can invite debate. “Uygulanacaktır” frames the obligation as an established institutional reality, leaving no space for discussion or delay.