Til indholdet
Svare

my attempts at translating

af makis, 22. dec. 2013

Meddelelser: 27

Sprog: English

makis (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 01.41.29

This was a little tough for me. Not sure I got it:

Like a drifting cloud,
bound by nothing:
I just let go
giving myself up
to the whim of the wind.

Kiel drivada nubo,
limigis per nenio:
mi simple liberigas min
por doni min
al la kapricovolo de la vento.

makis (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 01.42.11

horsto:It's not accusative. The words behind kiel can relate to the subject or to the object, you have to show to what they relate.
Ah, yes. That makes sense.

makis (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 01.46.23

Miland:La ŝtelisto ne povis preni ĝin -
la luno
je cxe la fenestro.
I had ĉe at first! But it felt weird so I went with the catchall "je" instead. lango.gif

Miland (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 10.46.12

Here's one suggestion:
Kiel nubo drivanta
Per nenio liganta
Mi lasis min
al la kaprico venta

jismith1989 (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 13.58.44

horsto:
makis:
horsto:kiel montan neĝon.
Hmm, why the accusative here?
It's not accusative. The words behind kiel can relate to the subject or to the object, you have to show to what they relate.
That would be an accusative, if you're using it to show that it relates to the object: that's what accusative means. ridulo.gif But you shouldn't really do that with kiel because it's a preposition and prepositions never take the accusative in Esperanto (except to show movement towards, e.g. en la domon), so you just have to work out which it goes with by context (e.g. word order).

Nile (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 15.09.12

Yeah, Esperanto has nothing against having a rigid clause order.

michaleo (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 15.43.27

jismith1989:
horsto:
makis:
horsto:kiel montan neĝon.
Hmm, why the accusative here?
It's not accusative. The words behind kiel can relate to the subject or to the object, you have to show to what they relate.
That would be an accusative, if you're using it to show that it relates to the object: that's what accusative means. ridulo.gif But you shouldn't really do that with kiel because it's a preposition and prepositions never take the accusative in Esperanto (except to show movement towards, e.g. en la domon), so you just have to work out which it goes with by context (e.g. word order).
Accusative, depending on the meaning, can or cannot be used after kiel. I suggest to read Kiel kaj ol kune kun rolmontriloj

jismith1989 (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 15.55.18

michaleo:Accusative, depending on the meaning, can or cannot be used after kiel. I suggest to read Kiel kaj ol kune kun rolmontriloj
Oh, I didn't know that, thanks.

Obviously, the rule that N is never used after a preposition except to show movement is wrong then. Are there any more exceptions, does anyone know?

erinja (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 15.57.39

This one isn't an exception, btw. It reflects the fact that words are missing from the sentence, and N is used as if those words were present.

It's like how we put -n on "Bonan matenon" - it's n that's there because there are missing words (like, "[Mi deziras al vi] bonan matenon" )

jismith1989 (Vise profilen) 23. dec. 2013 16.02.11

erinja:This one isn't an exception, btw. It reflects the fact that words are missing from the sentence, and N is used as if those words were present.

It's like how we put -n on "Bonan matenon" - it's n that's there because there are missing words (like, "[Mi deziras al vi] bonan matenon" )
Okay, I suppose that's a good explanation.

Tilbage til start