Many studies on Anatolian dialects have been carried out by local and foreign researchers until today and continue to be done. Although dialect studies have been emphasized in our country since the 1940s, there is a dialect regions that has not been studied yet. Rapid changes and developments in social, cultural and various technical fields affect the dialect characteristics of that region and bring it closer to the written language. Although today’s studies on dialects have reached a significant level in terms of quantity, they have not reached a sufficient level in terms of quality. Studies have been conducted on various aspects of dialects, but while some researchers examined Anatolian dialects in terms of phonetics, morphology and sentence information, others examined them only in terms of phonetics. In our opinion, voice suffixes were handled with a shape-based approach in the morphology section of these dialect studies, without giving much importance to them and without taking their functions into consideration. Looking at the issue within the framework of a form-centered approach has led to ignoring the fact that morphemes with the same phonetic value perform different functions. The –(I4)l- suffix used for “passive voice” and “reflexive voice” that we examined in Anatolian dialects was handled with a meaning-function-oriented approach and its functions were determined accordingly. While determining the functions of passive voice and reflexive voice suffixes, their relationship with other suffixes and words in the sentence was taken into consideration in order to base the context of the text on.

Passive voice, reflexive voice, function, meaning-function.