Al la enhavo

Some questions and corrections

de Smartyy, 2012-oktobro-05

Mesaĝoj: 35

Lingvo: English

Smartyy (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 03:55:04

Hey everyone!

I hope someone here has the patience to help with with a few questions, and possibly correct the first paragraph of this (probably horribly written) page of Esperanto.

My main question is that of verb tenses. I know that complex verbs (probably not the correct term, I believe it's called past perfect/present and future perfect) are a bit more difficult, but even thinking about English and trying to think "okay, in what 'part of time' is this happening?" I still find myself confused.

A few examples (which are in this paragraph that will be posted below) are like "I want to be." Would this be "Mi volas esti" or "Mi voli estas" or "voli esti" or even "volas estas?"
The other one that puzzled me was "I must write." To my ears, it sort of sounds like it's in the future tense, but happening in the present. Would this be "Mi devas skribos?"

As for the entire paragraph:
Mi volas esti esperanto verkisto, kaj skribos, ne, aŭtoras filozofojn librojn tute en esperanton. Unue, mi devas skribos kaj pensi en Esperanto. Kompreneble, la sola maniero fariĝi flua estas praktiki. Do, en la spirito de praktiki, mi estas skribos ĉi tiu tute paĝon en esperanton.
Thank you in advance for all your help!!

rpyle (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 04:24:39

I believe they would be "Mi volas esti" and "Mi devas skribi". The paragraph might read:

Mi volas esti esperanta verkisto, kaj skribos, ne, aŭtoros filozofajn librojn tute en Esperanto. Unue, mi devas skribi kaj pensi en Esperanto. Kompreneble, la sola maniero fariĝi flua estas praktiki. Do, en la spirito de praktiko, mi skribos ĉi tio tuta paĝon en Esperanto.

At least, that's my thought. A more able Esperantist might do it better than I can.

Hyperboreus (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 04:37:49

Forigite

darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 06:10:35

Hyperboreus:
?Mi devu skribi = Difficult to think of a possible use for that one. An imperative/jussive/hortative of "must" is a bit strange.
Maybe in a subclause: li faris tion nur, por ke mi devu skribi raporton kaj li ne! = he did that only so that I have to write a report and he doesn’t!

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 09:44:45

Am I compelled yet again to point out (ĉu mi devu atentigi por la mila fojo) that in Esperanto you can distinguish between:

1. Mi devus esti skribinta - I reflect now that I should have written

2. Mi estus devinta skribi - I would have had to write.

3. Mi devintus skribi - interpret according to context.

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 10:34:11

Esperanto generally prefers simple tenses, so while you can form these complex tenses as the true need arises (like Sudanglo points out), we generally stick with simple tenses.

Rpyle missed a couple of errors in the text. This is the corrected version:
Mi volas esti esperanta verkisto [another option: esperanto-verkisto, a single word], kaj skribos, ne, aŭtoros filozofajn librojn tute en Esperanto. Unue, mi devas skribi kaj pensi en Esperanto. Kompreneble, la sola maniero fariĝi flua estas praktiki. Do, en la spirito de praktiko, mi skribos ĉi tiun tutan paĝon en Esperanto.

-----

A little mnemonic for you - English tends to follow the same patterns as Esperanto, though not as regularly. So although we say "I must write" and not "I must to write", we otherwise generally inflect the modal verb and use an infinitive (to ...; ...-i) for the other verb.

I have TO GO (mi devas iri)
I like TO EAT (mi ŝatas manĝi)
I want TO SLEEP (mi volas dormi)

"must" is present tense. Future tense of "must" is something like "will have to", past tense is "had to". Obviously "has to" is an alternate present tense form of "must".

She had to go. - past tense. Ŝi devis iri.
She must go / She has to go. - present tense. Ŝi devas iri.
She will have to go. - future tense. Ŝi devos iri.

You learn a lot about English when studying Esperanto! It makes you think more carefully about the way sentences are constructed in English, and why.

Hyperboreus (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 17:10:06

Forigite

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 21:01:07

Sorry HB, but vi devus viziti nin. Doesn't mean vi devus esti veninta.

It is not correct to say that -us has no temporal implication.

Hyperboreus (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-05 22:08:29

Forigite

tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2012-oktobro-06 14:35:59

sudanglo:Sorry HB, but vi devus viziti nin. Doesn't mean vi devus esti veninta.

It is not correct to say that -us has no temporal implication.
Wrong. "Vi devus viziti nin" is quite possible for the meaning of "vi devus esti vizitinta", context depending.

Reen al la supro