Tin nhắn: 35
Nội dung: English
Smartyy (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 03:55:04 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
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 (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 04:24:39 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
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 (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 04:37:49 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
darkweasel (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 06:10:35 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
Hyperboreus: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!
?Mi devu skribi = Difficult to think of a possible use for that one. An imperative/jussive/hortative of "must" is a bit strange.
sudanglo (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 09:44:45 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
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 (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 10:34:11 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
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 (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 17:10:06 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
sudanglo (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 21:01:07 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
It is not correct to say that -us has no temporal implication.
Hyperboreus (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 22:08:29 Ngày 05 tháng 10 năm 2012
tommjames (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 14:35:59 Ngày 06 tháng 10 năm 2012
sudanglo:Sorry HB, but vi devus viziti nin. Doesn't mean vi devus esti veninta.Wrong. "Vi devus viziti nin" is quite possible for the meaning of "vi devus esti vizitinta", context depending.
It is not correct to say that -us has no temporal implication.