글: 8
언어: English
Nile (프로필 보기) 2013년 12월 17일 오후 4:47:53
jismith1989 (프로필 보기) 2013년 12월 17일 오후 9:06:53
The subject in the first sentence is just implied (i.e. there's not really one, it's an impersonal verb like "it's raining" in English: "it"'s the subject but it doesn't really mean anything, the phrase is just equivalent to "rain's falling" ), and in the second sentence it's mi (i.e. I love...).
Also, you can use kiel in place of ke in your last sentence. Possibly it'd be more natural to use ŝati or plaĉi (with an intensifier like tre or -eg), but ami is cool too -- people talk about loving things (as well as just people) in most languages.
Nile (프로필 보기) 2013년 12월 17일 오후 9:56:11
jismith1989:The subject in the first sentence is just implied (i.e. there's not really one, it's an impersonal verb like "it's raining" in English: "it"'s the subject but it doesn't really mean anything, the phrase is just equivalent to "rain's falling" )But in the first sentence, isn't it the subject? same as "afero" in "Interesas min afero."? I've read in Wiktionary that "it" is often used to delay the real subject this way.
[…]
Also, you can use kiel in place of ke in your last sentence.
Yes, but I would think that it chanes the meaning somewhat. "Mi amas, kiel" would be "I like the way/manner in which this happens", but in English, there's the added informal usage of it meaning "the fact that".
jismith1989 (프로필 보기) 2013년 12월 17일 오후 10:03:18
Nile:But in the first sentence, isn't it the subject? same as "afero" in "Interesas min afero."? I've read in Wiktionary that "it" is often used to delay the real subject this way.Mm, maybe you're right. I don't want to hurt my brain thinking about it.
Yes, but I would think that it chanes the meaning somewhat. "Mi amas, kiel" would be "I like the way/manner in which this happens", but in English, there's the added informal usage of it meaning "the fact that".
Either way, there's no N, which makes it nice and easy anyway.True, lots of languages use "how" in that way though, so it's not uncommon. But again you're right, ke does the job fine.
sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2013년 12월 18일 오후 10:09:44
Can't it be added to any correlative that ends in a vowel?Of course. But didn't I cover that with o-words, a-words and occasionally e-words?
You could argue that Kio, Tio etc aren't really o-words, and Kia, Tia etc not really a-words, rather instead just words that end in 'o' and 'a' respectively.
But even if they can't be read as compounds - eg Ki+o, Ti+o etc and Ki+a, Ti+a etc - the o-series and the a-series of the correlatives are in spirit o-words and a-words.
More debatable whether the e-series are in spirit e-words. But tie is quite like hejme.
Parts of speech wise, I suppose the u-series words are o-words.