Meldinger: 9
Språk: English
NATOLO (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 02:53:31
Which is a pen?
Tiu estas plumo.
That is a pen.
Kio estas tio?
What is that?
Tio estas plumo.
That is a pen.
Kia estas mia plumo?
What kind is my pen?
Via plumo ruĝas.
Your pen is red.
Kia plumo estas la mia?
What kind of pen is mine?
Tia blua plumo estas la via.
That blue pen is yours.
?Via plumo estas tia.
Your pen is that kind.
What is acceptable? I could think of more probably. Are there thorough guidelines? I'm trying to make a game out of this so I need to know what distinction is being made.
I was thinking of translating 'tio' as "that thing", and 'tiu' as "this one".
Evildela (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 03:15:36
Kio = what thing (unknown)
Tiu = that person / known thing
Tio = that thing (unknown)
Kia = what kind of (or in laymens English = describe)
Kia estas la plumo = Describe the pen
Kiajn filmojn vi volas spekti? = Describe (the types of) films you want to watch
Tia = that kind of
Ŝi estas stulta, mi ne ŝatas tiajn homojn = She is stupid, I don't like (those types of) people.
This means you don't like people "described" as stupid
RiotNrrd (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 03:50:27
Sometimes people say "tio" is referring to an unknown thing, but I feel that is a misleading description. It is referring to something that is simply unnamed in the sentence in which it appears.
(Imagine two people shopping...)
Tio estas bela! (Unnamed)
Jes, tiu aĵo estas tre bela. (Named, although pretty generically here)
Ĉu tio plaĉas al vi? (Unnamed)
Jes, sed mi pli ŝatas tiun alian aĵon. (Named)
When it isn't referring to a person, "tiu" is always accompanied by a noun. "Tio" never is. In the above conversation, the "aĵo" is referred to alternately both ways - it is "known" in every case; "tio" is only used when it isn't being specifically identified right then and there, in that sentence.
One could make the case that "tiu" could also be used in the third sentence in my example. This is true. In that case, however, it would be referring to an implied named noun, weird as that sounds. "Tiu" cannot stand on its own.
erinja (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 11:41:42
Like saying to a shopkeeper, "Mi prenos tiun" (I'll take that one), while pointing to a specific one.
The thing with "tiu" is that you definitely have to have a specific person or thing in mind, and the specific person or thing has to be clear either from context or from your actions (or from the noun that you put in)
NATOLO (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 15:28:03
Kio estas tio?
Kiu estas tiu?
Can I respond with tio or tiu equally?
Tio estas ŝtono.
Tiu estas ŝtono.
And when do I use "it"="ĝi"?
Can I mix them, like,
Kiu estas tio?
RiotNrrd (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 18:23:14
erinja:Like saying to a shopkeeper, "Mi prenos tiun" (I'll take that one), while pointing to a specific one.That's what I meant by an "implied named noun"; the specific object being referred to is still being identified (by the pointing), even if that identification isn't verbalized. "Tiu" is about specificity. So, I still claim that "tiu" cannot stand alone - it requires a noun of some sort (real or implied).
"Tio", on the other hand, not only doesn't require an identified noun, it forbids it; "tio aĵo" is always incorrect.
cspinola (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 14 20:07:56
Admin: Please translate your message into English. It's ok to post in Esperanto but since this is the English forum, you should include an English translation. You can edit your existing message
Ganove (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 15 00:34:20
NATOLO:Is there an easy distinction between kio, kiu kaj kia?Kio asks for an unknown o-word (noun).
Kiu ask for a person or a known o-word (noun).
Kia ask for an a-word (propperty, adjektive).
Tio points at an unknown o-word.
Tiu points at a known person or a thing.
In both cases it is similar to the English 'this' or 'that'.
Tia points at an a-word (propperty, adjektive).
NATOLO:Well, if I point and ask, 'What is that?' what should I use?Since you point at a specific thing, you should use 'Kiu estas tiu?'
Kio estas tio?
Kiu estas tiu?
NATOLO:Can I respond with tio or tiu equally?If you want to answer the previous question you should keep the level of awareness: 'Tiu estas ŝtono.'
Tio estas ŝtono.
Tiu estas ŝtono.
If you first ask 'Kiu estas tiu?' and then answer with 'Tio estas...' that would sound like first you know something but then you suddely don't know it anymore.
NATOLO:And when do I use 'it'='ĝi'?'ĝi' refers to a previous thing, in contrast, 'tio/tiu' points at a thing.
You use 'ĝi' if you don't want to repeat the last noun.
For example:
'Mi vidis aŭton. Ĝi (la aŭto) estis blua.'
'I saw car. It (the car) was blue.'
'Tio (montrante al io) estas domo. Ĝi (la domo) estas granda.'
'This (pointing at something) is a house. It (the house) is large.'
NATOLO:Can I mix them, like,No, you can't. It would conflict the level of awareness.
Kiu estas tio?
If you ask for a 'kiu', which means you ask for a known person or object, it can't get 'unknow' in its 'pointing' word.
RiotNrrd (Å vise profilen) 2013 2 15 02:26:36
"Kio" means "what".
The question "Which is that?" would thus properly translate as "Kiu estas tio?". It is fine to mix together any correlatives in a sentence, as long as the mixture makes sense. This is an area of Esperanto where it might seem like there ought to be a bunch of rules. But there really aren't. "Does it make sense?" really is the main guideline to follow.
"What is that?" would be "Kio estas tio?". You could also say "Kio estas tiu?", as they are more or less interchangeable in a simple construction like this, although the "tiu" conveys a stronger sense of identification within a group of things - the difference between "What is that?" and "What is that one?". There is a small difference. Personally, my tendency is to match the correlatives, so I would in general favor "Kio estas tio?" over "Kio estas tiu?". But sometimes it makes sense to use the latter. If you're holding the thing up in the air and tapping on it while exclaiming "Kio estas tiu?", you're on firm ground.