訊息: 28
語言: English
captainzhang (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月15日下午5:33:11
efilzeo:If "kontraŭ" means "against" I don't think that would make sense.sudanglo:Slightly off-topic, but how would you distinguish between:We could use kontraŭ, right?
I threw the ball at the boy, or I threw the egg at the politician, and
I threw the ball to the boy
which are both different to:
I threw the ball towards the boy.
It seems to me that in Esperanto 'al' may cover all three cases.
"at the boy" means in the direction or near the boy, not against him
"to the boy" implies that he caught it (also "to the boy" implies cooperation, but if you said "konstaux la knabo" that implies an act of force, like "against the wall"
"towards the boy" mentions direction but doesn't imply that the boy caught it
It seems like "at the boy" and "towards the boy" could correctly be translated as the same, or nearly so
but,
"to the boy" is too different in meaning
I wondering if all these distinctions can be made using "al la knabo" but adding some affix that suggest direction as the accusative ending does, or perhaps all the distinctions could be made more explicit with affixes, however I am a beginner and do not have a lot of knowledge of the different affixes.
orthohawk (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月15日下午9:20:30
captainzhang:Well, part of the problem is thy (mis)understanding of the "n of direction": in every language I've seen that uses it (mostly European ones) the equivalent (usually accusative) is used when the meaning is that the moving object actually arrived at the destination intended. E.g. in thy sentence, "la knabon" (which is inadvisable anyway due to there being an accusative already) would indicate that the ball actually arrived either in the boy's hands or made some contact with some part of his body. "al la knabo" would be the same thing......maybe. It seems there is no exact equivalent of "toward" in Esperanto that is definitively different to "to". Maybe "en la direkto de" la knabo.Fenris_kcf:In theory one can express indirect objects by leaving out the preposition and using the accusative of the noun. But i would highly recommend not to do this, when there already is a accusative-object.I see, so are you saying that "al la knabo" would make more sense because there is already an accusative in the sentence. I understand how people would use the accusative for indiect objects as well instead of prepositions but it makes things more ambiguious. If you didn't know which way a person meant in this sentence then it could mean either "I threw the ball to the boy" or "I threw the ball towards the boy" which are significantly different. The one implies that the boy caught the ball while the other is more ambiguious.
I do appreciate your time and input, thanks.
yyaann (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月15日下午11:09:20
captainzhang:It seems like "at the boy" and "towards the boy" could correctly be translated as the same, or nearly soTo remove any ambiguity I would say
but,
"to the boy" is too different in meaning
Mi ĵetis la pilkon knaben
to translate the idea in "at the boy"/"towards the boy" (-en is unambiguously understood as indicating direction)
and
Mi ĵetdonis la pilkon al la knabo
to convey the same idea as in "to the boy". (If I'm throwing the ball to the boy to give it to him, then there is a fair chance that I'm not doing it against his will).
yyaann (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月15日下午11:15:27
erinja:I wouldn't say knaben or knabinen.I have read constructions similar to rigardi vizaĝen in books and yet a face isn't exactly a place either.
You can only use that -en ending for indication of direction when it is appended to root indicating a place. I don't think a boy or a girl is really a place.
Duko (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月16日上午8:58:46
den Ball = accusative (object of action)
dem Knaben = dative (receiver of action)
zugeworfen = the verb even is not simply "geworfen", but receives the "zu" preposition meaning "to", as prefix.
Same for other languages, a Slavic language would put "boy" in dative case. Well, except for Bulgarian/Macedonian, they lost the dative case just like English. But, same as English, Bulgarian has distinct prepositions for receiver and for direction ("to" vs. towards", "на" vs. "към" )
In Esperanto, if there can be a receiver of the action, I would interpret "al" to indicate just that, the receiver.
Mi donis la pilkon al la knabo = I gave the ball to the boy.
Mi ĵetis la pilkon al la knabo = I threw the ball to the boy.
I like though how "ĵetdonis" eliminates ambiguity.
I think that for indicating direction the most straightforward solution is to state direction explicitly: "en la direkto de la knabo".
Lernu! dictionary translates "towards" as "rilate al, ale al, al, ĉirkaŭ"
Is "ale al" a possible solution here for "towards"? Would you understand it if someone said "Mi ĵetis la pilkon ale al la knabo"?
Kirilo81 (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月16日上午11:27:56
Duko:Lernu! dictionary translates "towards" as "rilate al, ale al, al, ĉirkaŭ"A quick search in the Tekstaro: 0 hits for ale al, but at least 19 for the much better understandable direkte al (cf. with Google + kaj: 3,610 vs. 266,000 hits).
Is "ale al" a possible solution here for "towards"? Would you understand it if someone said "Mi ĵetis la pilkon ale al la knabo"?
I have never seen or heard ale al before.
sudanglo (顯示個人資料) 2013年12月16日下午12:19:36
This is clearly in Esperanto en la direkto al.
[Though if the object itself has some direction or a goal then one may use en la direkto de. For example, en la direkto de la vento.
Note the contrast between en la direkto de la akvofluo and en la direkto al la akvofluo (though here kontraŭ is better for the meaning of counter-current motion)]
However, it seems to me that 'al' doesn't necessarily imply arrival. But to throw a ball to someone strongly implies that the ball was caught.
So the problem is distinguishing between throwing an egg at a politician (which might land you in court) and throwing an egg to a politician (which is not anti-social).
EDIT: perhaps you just have to rely on context or re-word.