Al la enhavo
Respondi

Witnessing another's actions

de Hound_of_God, 2014-septembro-01

Mesaĝoj: 19

Lingvo: English

Hound_of_God (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 11:21:00

How would I say things like "I saw him do that" or "She heard me say it" ?

sergejm (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 12:14:40

Mi vidis ke li faris tion.
Ŝi aŭdis ke mi diris tion.
In the case of vidi (see) and aŭdi (listen) you can shorten the sentences:
Mi vidis lin fari tion.
Ŝi aŭdis min diri tion.

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 16:22:35

Another option would be participles:

Mi vidis lin faranta tion.
Mi auxdis lin diranta tion.

Nota bene: In this case, the participle does not take the -n ending, albeit it refers to lin which has an -n.

BoriQa (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 18:29:15

nornen:Another option would be participles:

Mi vidis lin faranta tion.
Mi auxdis lin diranta tion.

Nota bene: In this case, the participle does not take the -n ending, albeit it refers to lin which has an -n.
Why not nornen?

Doesn't the participle act as an adjective? In which case it should take the accusative ending?

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 18:57:01

BoriQa:
nornen:Another option would be participles:

Mi vidis lin faranta tion.
Mi auxdis lin diranta tion.

Nota bene: In this case, the participle does not take the -n ending, albeit it refers to lin which has an -n.
Why not nornen?

Doesn't the participle act as an adjective? In which case it should take the accusative ending?
It does take the adjective ending, and it does agree in number, but it does not agree in case. Same holds for "pure" (base-derived) adjectives in this kind of sentences:

Mi vidis lin kolera.
Mi vidis ilin koleraj.

As you see, the number (singular or plural) is the same, but the predicative does not take the accusative, albeit it refers to the accusative object.

The pattern is:
Mi farbis la bluan vandon ruĝa.

BoriQa (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 21:14:48

nornen:It does take the adjective ending, and it does agree in number, but it does not agree in case. Same holds for "pure" (base-derived) adjectives in this kind of sentences:

Mi vidis lin kolera.
Mi vidis ilin koleraj.

As you see, the number (singular or plural) is the same, but the predicative does not take the accusative, albeit it refers to the accusative object.

The pattern is:
Mi farbis la bluan vandon ruĝa.
Thanks again for the lesson nornen.

BoriQa (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-01 21:24:15

nornen:Another option would be participles:

Mi vidis lin faranta tion.
Mi auxdis lin diranta tion.

Nota bene: In this case, the participle does not take the -n ending, albeit it refers to lin which has an -n.
I understood your explanation on the participle, but now I have a doubt about the accusative on "tion".

The double accusative confuses me.

Why does it take the accusative (given that "lin" is already in the accusative)?

Could the first sentence be instead:

Mi vidis al li faranta tion.
or
Mi vidis lin faranta je tio.

sergejm (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-02 05:03:18

BoriQa:
Could the first sentence be instead:

Mi vidis al li faranta tion.
or
Mi vidis lin faranta je tio.
nornen has forgotten:
Nota bene2: this is for verbs "vidi" and "aŭdi" only (there are some other verbs in the list, you can try find them in tekstaro.com)
For other verb this construction may mean two other things. The discursion is in other thread in this forum, where I put the list of the verbs.
With some verbs they use 'al', as you did, but not with "vidi", which needs a direct object:
Mi permesis al li fari tion.

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-02 05:03:32

BoriQa:
nornen:Another option would be participles:

Mi vidis lin faranta tion.
Mi auxdis lin diranta tion.

Nota bene: In this case, the participle does not take the -n ending, albeit it refers to lin which has an -n.
I understood your explanation on the participle, but now I have a doubt about the accusative on "tion".

The double accusative confuses me.

Why does it take the accusative (given that "lin" is already in the accusative)?

Could the first sentence be instead:

Mi vidis al li faranta tion.
or
Mi vidis lin faranta je tio.
There is no double accusative. There are two verbs and each with its own accusative.

Mi vidas lin. Li faras tion.
Mi vidas lin faranta tion.

The fact that "lin" is at the same time the direct object of "vidas" and the subject of "faranta", is another matter. If you want to explore this topic a bit further, take a look here and here and here.

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2014-septembro-02 12:27:10

Doesn't the participle act as an adjective? In which case it should take the accusative ending?
This issue is rather subtle and somewhat difficult to explain clearly.

Usually when the meaning is more ke iu(j) faras, then you wouldn't use the accusative with the participle.

However when the meaning is more like kiu(j) faras (or kiam iu(j) faras) there can be agreement in case.

Some examples from la Biblio:

li vidis aliajn starantajn senokupe sur la placo
La sekvantan tagon li vidis Jesuon venanta al li, kaj diris
Sed la disĉiploj, vidante lin iranta sur la maro, maltrankviliĝis, dirante
kaj vidis la gloron de Dio, kaj Jesuon starantan dekstre de Dio, kaj diris
Mi vidis Satanon falanta de la ĉielo, kiel fulmo

I believe this is discussed somewhere in PMEG.

Reen al la supro