You have verbs like "dogged" and adverbs "doggedly" in English too.
Generating verbs ("dogged", one syllable) from nouns ("dog") is absolutely universal among ALL languages, inflected or no, but is a much less regular process than the adjective-to-adverb derivation, as the relationship between an arbitrary noun and an arbitrary related verb is much less regular than that between an adverb and its matching adjective. English is pretty free in deriving verbs. Latin very obviously has methods of deriving verbs and adjectives from other parts of speech, but those are generally not given any formal grammatical treatment when you study the language -- it's expected that you'll just pick them up by feel.
Or, as Calvin said: “Verbing weirds language”
Any chance you know the term in linguistics for verbing things? I want to look it up because you're right that this feels like a natural thing to do, it's surprising that Turkish doesn't allow it.
I did find a paper on Google Scholar purporting to list "derivations producing verbs from nouns" in Turkish, "An Outline of Turkish Morphology" by Oflazer, Göçmen, and Bozşahin.
In some language you can form several levels of diminutives from any noun. Even stuff that makes no sense, like "cute taxes", "cute death", "cute abstraction", "cute declension".
And you can form the opposite - take a noun and create less cute/uglier/larger version of it.
And these additional forms still obey the other rules, including declension. So there's a combinatorial explosion of versions of each word.
A cute abstraction would definitely be my thing. As we would say in Italian, an astrazioncella, or astrazionuccia, or astrazioncelluccia, or astrazioncinuccia, or astrazioncinelluccia. :)
They don't. Your teacher was a pervert. :)
Woda, wódka, wódeczka, wódzia, wódziunia.
and then if you don't like drinking you can go the other way:
wódka, wóda, wódzicha.