К содержанию
Ответить

Questions about use of accusative

от Echo49, 1 ноября 2011 г.

Сообщений: 14

Язык: English

Echo49 (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 12:09:17

I've been studying Esperanto from an old book (first published 1946) I found at my university library called Nelson's Esperanto Course. I haven't had any problems with it, but then I came across this paragraph introducing the future tense -os (emphasis mine):
Kiam ĉiu konscios pri la utileco de Esperanto, tiam komenciĝos nova epoko en la historio de la civilizacio. Ni ne dubas, ke venos tempo kiam ĉiu knabo kaj ĉiu knabino lernos ĉi tiun belan lingvon en la lernejo. Tiam niaj lernantoj povos interŝanĝi leterojn kun amikoj en aliaj landoj kie oni parolas diversajn lingvojn. Poste ili interŝanĝos ankaŭ vizitojn, kaj ili povos bonege paroli unu kun la alia, ĉar ili havos komunan lingvon.
Should the bolded parts be in accusative case -n? How should "unu kun la alia" be conjugated?

horsto (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 12:23:42

nova epoko and tempo are subjects, allthough they are standing behind the verb.
unu kun la alia means:
unu povas paroli kun la alia

lgg (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 12:28:54

No, as the first 2 are subjects, and 3rd one is adverbial:
(S)Nova epoko (V)komencigxos;
(S)Tempo (V) venos;
(S)Ili (V)povos ... paroli (Adv)Unu kun la alia.

Only direct objects and adverbials of targeted movement are in accusative.

Echo49 (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 14:34:50

Now that it's been pointed out and I've thought about it, it makes perfect sense.

Perhaps it's due to the lack of obvious distinction in English between nouns as subject and object, but the position of the noun intuitively makes me think of it as the subject or the object. For example, even after I translated it to English I didn't think of those nouns as subjects until I realised you can put it in front of the verb (like lgg did).

For example,
Ni ne dubas, ke venos tempo kiam ...
translates to
We don't doubt that there will come a time when ...
which, to me, intuitively makes "time" sound like the object.

Instead,
We don't doubt that a time will come when ...
makes "time" sound intuitively like the subject.

... Actually, after writing this, I'm beginning to wonder whether "time" is the subject or the object in the phrase "there will come a time".

erinja (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 19:03:16

Time is the subject of "there will come a time"

In English, we also sometimes vary word order for emphasis!

Another clue is that "come" is not transitive - it isn't an action that one thing can do to another. Therefore "come" NEVER has an object.

sudanglo (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 19:35:51

I'm not sure about that, Erinja - isn't 'there' a dummy subject, like 'it' in 'it is raining?

Of course, if you turn it round and say 'a time will come', then clearly 'time' is the subject.

However, in Esperanto, it doesn't matter whether you say 'venos tempo' or 'tempo venos', 'tempo' is still the subject. The reason for inverting the usual order in the sentence in this passage is to put the correlative 'kiam' close to what it relates to.

I suspect that it is much easier for the brain to process a sentence like 'necesas decidi kiu gajnis' than 'decidi kiu gajnis, necesas'.

English deals with such sentences by starting them with a dummy subject.

darkweasel (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 20:06:39

sudanglo:I'm not sure about that, Erinja - isn't 'there' a dummy subject, like 'it' in 'it is raining?
In my opinion, not really.

I guess - and I am sure that ceigered will correct me on this - that constructions like "there will come a time" come from an earlier stage of English when it was still a V2 language like German is today (so the verb had to stand at the second position in the sentence). Anyway, isn’t "there" an adverb? And can an adverb even logically be a subject, even a dummy subject?

Echo49 (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 23:14:17

erinja:Another clue is that "come" is not transitive - it isn't an action that one thing can do to another. Therefore "come" NEVER has an object.
Is it true to say that this applies to all -iĝi verbs?

horsto (Показать профиль) 1 ноября 2011 г., 23:31:48

Echo49:
erinja:Another clue is that "come" is not transitive - it isn't an action that one thing can do to another. Therefore "come" NEVER has an object.
Is it true to say that this applies to all -iĝi verbs?
You are right. There are verbs which never can have an object, for example all verbs with the suffix "iĝ".

Echo49 (Показать профиль) 3 ноября 2011 г., 13:02:36

lgg:adverbials of targeted movement are in accusative.
Is this an example? Why is it that only the first instance has -n?
Kiam ili poste revenas hejmen, ili ne sole mem parolas pli pura, sed ili alportas modelon de bona parolado al tiuj, kiuj restas hejme.

Наверх