إلى المحتويات
رد

Who did he say was coming?

من sudanglo, 23 يناير، 2013

المشاركات: 44

لغة: English

sudanglo (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 10:17:03 ص

A thread was recently started in the Esperanto section of the Forums as to how Esperanto expresses ideas like this.

It was suggested with some assistance from PMEG that one should say Pri kiu li diris, ke tiu venos. Note the tiu to avoid having to specify the sex of who he said was coming.

My problem is that searching the Tekstaro I couldn't find a single example (perhaps you can do better) of a question like this using Pri kiu. But this type of double question seems the sort that should occur freqently.

I can't believe that the languages of Europe don't have a way of handling this structure.

erinja (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 11:27:34 ص

You can say it in simpler ways than that. "Kiu, laŭ li, venos?" or "Li diris ke *kiu* venos?" would be alternatives.

sudanglo (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 12:52:39 م

"Kiu, laŭ li, venos?"
Of course, Erinja. But this doesn't distinguish between diri, kredi, supozi, suspekti, decidi etc - who did he say, believe, suppose, suspect, decide was coming.

And I suspect that the problem with this type of double question is wider than sentences where 'laŭ' would be a solution.

Your second solution has more precision and generality. The 'ke' neatly distinguishes between, for example, she said who was coming and who did she say was coming.

tommjames (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 1:02:40 م

For "who did he say was coming?" I would probably say "Li diris, ke venos kiu?". But if no precision is needed with regards to whether he said it, thought it, suspected it etc I could quite happily go with the "laŭ" construction. That phrase from PMEG seems like a bit too much of a mouthful for my liking.

sudanglo (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 1:32:47 م

I agree Tom. I also did a search in the Tekstaro for indicative verb followed by ke kiu (with or without a preceding comma) and of the seven hits not one was a question.

sudanglo (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 3:30:41 م

An example where laŭ+pronoun might seem a little odd is 'Who did we decide should have the money?'

It seems a bit strange to say Kiu, laŭ ni, devus havi/ricevi la monon. That is almost as if we haven't yet made the decision.

In this case however there is an easy work-around Kion ni decidis pri kiu ricevu la monon?

tommjames (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 4:15:19 م

sudanglo:It seems a bit strange to say Kiu, laŭ ni, devus havi/ricevi la monon. That is almost as if we haven't yet made the decision..
Yes that is a bit odd. This probably shows that the ideal way of translating these kinds of indirect-speech questions is likely to depend a fair bit on the type of phrase and words used. In this case it seems like it's "we decided" that makes "laŭ ni" inappropriate. But if you change "we/ni" to "they/ili", it doesn't seem so bad.

EldanarLambetur (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 10:44:46 م

I like the "laŭ li" solution, but as pointed out, it loses generality.

I also like the "Li diris ke *kiu* venos?" solution, especially for speech. It seems quite direct. Though the emphasis seems quite important in the interpretation.

The PMEG "pri kiu" solution seems quite roundabout.

I wonder, does it make sense to resort to adverbs?

E.g.

Decide de li, kiu venos?
Krede de li, kiu venos?

Like a kind of
"on/by/according to his belief, who will come?"
"on/by/according to his decision, who will come?"

Do you need a "laŭ" in there somewhere? Does it make any sense?

Tempodivalse (عرض الملف الشخصي) 23 يناير، 2013 11:05:51 م

EldanarLambetur:
I wonder, does it make sense to resort to adverbs?

E.g.

Decide de li, kiu venos?
Krede de li, kiu venos?

Like a kind of
"on/by/according to his belief, who will come?"
"on/by/according to his decision, who will come?"
At first blush it didn't seem at all obvious how to parse those adverbs. I'm trying to think of how exactly we interpret adverb + de. I can think of "okaze de" (in case of), "senkonsidere de" (irrespective of), "rilate de" (pertaining to, although "al" or accusative is more customary). But "Krede de li" = "believing of him"? "in the belief of him?"

Okay, I so after a few minutes' turning it over in my head, I think your suggestion is acceptable, although depending on how much the surrounding context elucidates it, the phrase seems ambiguous at best. I think the shortest and directest translation would be "Li diris ke venos kiu?" (or "kiu venos" depending on emphasis).

If we wanted to be a little more specific, I could propose "Laŭ lia kredo/decido/etc., kiu venos?" but that's not so concise.

EldanarLambetur (عرض الملف الشخصي) 24 يناير، 2013 12:41:33 ص

Ah, that's a shame!

Either way, here was my inspiration, if you're interested:

http://bertilow.com/pmeg/gramatiko/rolmontriloj/ro...

Especially "sekve de", as a kind of "following from...". So when you inquire something "krede de", you're enquiring about a belief originating from the object of "de".

The "e-word + de" construction often seemed to translate to "on/by/to (or other preposition) the [o-word] of/from...". So I just jammed the ideas together. ridego.gif

عودة للاعلى