Out of curiousity, do you need the locative case to use бар in Tartar? (i.e.: Синеңде)

Your sentence is probably right, but I just know that in Uighur you almost always need the locative... So, if you wanted to say "I have an apple", it would be "Mende bir alma bar", as opposed to "Men bir..."

Loctive would be синдә/sindә.
My sentence is probably right, because I've copied the construction from a self-study manual. ^_^
The phrases I've used as a reference:
Аның күп китабы бар. Искәндәрнең 800 китабы бар.

But I haven't seen phrases like "Синдаь китабынъ бар". Синдаь seems to refer to place, not to possessivity. Actually, sometimes it's even used when location is obvious, e.g Сыйныфның ике тәрәзәсе бар / There are 2 windows in the classroom (also from self-study manual).

But my Tatar is very poor.

> So, if you wanted to say "I have an apple",
> it would be "Mende bir alma bar", as opposed to "Men bir..."
Uyghur 'men' seems to correspond to Tatar 'мин'.
'Минем' is a possessive case of "мин", "синең" is the poss. case of "син".

Let me guess... Did Uyghur drop the Possisive case?

Hmm, I don't know if this is true in Tatar (again, all I can say is that I've seen a lot of similarities with Uighur from reading your sentences), but at least in Uighur you can actually have two forms for the locative of "I" and "you (informal)". You can use both "mende" and "meningde", and they both mean (roughly speaking) "on me". Same with "sen" - "sende" and "seningde". That's why I said синеңде was locative of син (in Uighur, it would be).

But no, Uighur does have the "ning" to denote possessive. And actually, after researching a bit more, you can use "-ning... bar" in Uighur as well, it seems (along with "-da/de/ta/te... bar"). It's just that the locative+'bar' seems more commonly used that the possessive+'bar'.

So, there's a nearly perfect correspondence :-)