Mesaĝoj: 10
Lingvo: English
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 10:22:56
Now in some contexts the use of an -us form, without an accompanying se may not be so different from the -as form - ĉu vi povas/povus diri al mi, kie ...?
On other occasions there is a big pragmatic/communicative difference.
(-us): How would I know who took the money?
(-as): How do I know who took the money?
The specific issue I'd like to raise in this thread is what to use in the case of reported speech regarding an unrealised event.
In French as well as in English and possibly other languages You told me it would be easy (it isn't!), uses the same form as for the conditional.
However the application of the simple rule in Esperanto that you should use the same tense in the reported speech as in the direct speech, so vi diris, ke tio estos facila, to my mind, fails to capture the meaning that it most certainly didn't turn out to be easy - almost the opposite.
The question is: by saying Vi diris ke tio estus facila (li plendas) can I convey the unrealised aspect. Does this form imply it wasn't easy?
Simon Pure (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 10:55:26
sudanglo:If you took the 'but' and 'he complained' out of the English sentence, does this statement still contain the sense of not being easy? The 'but' introduces the idea that it was not easy and 'he complained' makes it certain.
The question is: by saying Vi diris ke tio estus facila (li plendas) can I convey the unrealised aspect. Does this form imply it wasn't easy?
'You told me it would be easy, and you were right.'
'You told me it would be easy,' he said with a smile.
Spoken the implication would come from tone of voice. Written you need those accompanying words to clarify.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 11:19:08
Because in English the 'would' is indeterminate in reported speech as to the original speech (will or would) you may need context or intonation to separate the two ideas.
But in Esperanto, theoretically at least, the level of doubtfulness of the original assertion is preserved. -us goes to -us , -os goes to -os.
My question goes beyond that and asks whether the complaining meaning (the unrealised event) can be layered onto vi diris ke estus.
Vestitor (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 14:24:06
The only other solution, in either language, is to be explicit and write something like: 'You fooled me into believing it would be easy' ...Vi trompis min en kredante ke estus facila. Or something like.
Chainy (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 19:38:10
sudanglo:(-us): How would I know who took the money?= Kiel mi devas scii, kiu forprenis la monon?
sudanglo:The specific issue I'd like to raise in this thread is what to use in the case of reported speech regarding an unrealised event.I don't really understand what the problem is. In context it's perfectly clear whether the event has or has not already taken place. So, surely it will always be perfectly fine to say "Vi diris, ke estos facile."
In French as well as in English and possibly other languages You told me it would be easy (it isn't!), uses the same form as for the conditional.
sudanglo:The question is: by saying Vi diris ke tio estus facila (li plendas) can I convey the unrealised aspect. Does this form imply it wasn't easy?[/quote]I very much doubt you can use such a form. I don't remember ever coming across anything like that.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 20:25:56
It was that, that provoked my query.
You could put my question another way: does is VR-is, ke V-us in Esperanto definitively mean that the direct speech was in the conditional?
Of course there are ways of formulating that can explicity express the non-realisation, but none of these would be so snappy as the VR-is ke Vus. In human affairs this sort of disappointment is a pretty a common complaint.
Vestitor, very interesting - vi trompe kredigis min ke tio estus facila. BUT isn't that still a type of report, subject to the standard text-book Esperanto rules of tense usage?
What did he make me believe, what was my thought - 'It will be easy', or 'It would be easy'?
Do we now have 3 languages Dutch, English and French in which a conditional form in the subclause is indeterminate as to the original direct speech, covering both future and conditional? What about Spanish and Italian?
Vestitor (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 22:52:13
Hyperboreus (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-09 23:10:25
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-10 11:15:39
I'd put the question as follows:
1. Is Vi kredigis min, ke ne estus problemo subject to the normal tense rules of reported speech.,
Does it imply Mi kredis ke ne estus problemo rather than Mi kredis ke ne estos problemo?
2. In actual usage does Mi pensis ke ne estus problemo imply that there is a problem, or is it completely neutral?
Is it strange to say Mi pensis ke ne estos problemo in circumstances where it has turned out that there is a problem.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-aŭgusto-10 11:28:30
Interestingly, I was already toying with some variants in Esperanto along the lines of 'estuntos' and 'estontus' but hadn't yet made up my mind what they would imply.