Ir ao conteúdo

Omitting the accusative with iĝ?

de Alkanadi, 7 de outubro de 2015

Mensagens: 14

Idioma: English

Alkanadi (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 07:47:20

Why is the accusative omitted in this case?

Eble mi ŝatus fariĝi kuracisto.

jagr2808 (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 07:54:31

vi ŝatus (fariĝi kuracisto)
ne, ŝatus fariĝi (kuracisto)

mi pensas.....

mi tute ne scias

Kirilo81 (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 08:34:27

Counterquestion: Why should there be an accusative here at all? I see no object, cf. the similar Mi volus esti kuracisto.

johmue (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 08:35:49

Alkanadi:Why is the accusative omitted in this case?

Eble mi ŝatus fariĝi kuracisto.
For the same reason it is not used in the sentence "Mi ŝatus esti kuracisto."

The thing is that "kuracisto" is not an object of an act, but a property of the subject. If you say "Mi estas kuracisto." or "Mi fariĝas kuracisto." you are not talking about an act that you perform on a doctor but you are talking about a property that you have or will have.

Alkanadi (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 09:41:01

johmue:you are not talking about an act that you perform on a doctor
Oh, okay. That makes sense. i guess it has to do with transitivity.

sudanglo (Mostrar o perfil) 7 de outubro de 2015 11:05:12

An iĝ verb can be followed by an accusative. But then the function is not to designate a direct object of the iĝ verb.

Examples from the Tekstaro:

Marta videble ŝanceliĝis momenton (dum momento)
oni povis vidi la terlangon etendiĝi kilometrojn en du direktoj (je kilometroj)
Kiam iu aliĝas organizon (al organizo)
li eble ankoraŭ decidiĝos tion fari (tion object of fari)


However, there are some dubious examples in the Tekstaro, where the author seems to be treating the iĝ verb as being capable of taking a direct object - even the following from Z.

Ekrigardu tra fendeto kaj sciiĝu ĉion

Though you could argue that this is just the accusative instead of a preposition.

But after fariĝi, always the nominative.

eshapard (Mostrar o perfil) 15 de outubro de 2015 19:34:36

Alkanadi:Why is the accusative omitted in this case?

Eble mi ŝatus fariĝi kuracisto.
Fariĝi is an intransitive verb. So it doesn't take a direct object. Therefore it can't place a noun in the accusative case.

You're basically saying that possibly you'd like to be made [into] a doctor. You're not making the doctor (direct object/accusative), you're having something (yourself; a university, perhaps?) make you into the doctor (indirect object).

Tempodivalse (Mostrar o perfil) 16 de outubro de 2015 02:58:04

Technically the "kuracisto" in "Mi volus fariĝi kuracisto" is a predicative, but Esperanto lacks the case system to make this overt. (In Slavic languages, for example, "kuracisto" would be in the instrumental case, not the nominative. This makes things quite clear.)

The rule of thumb is that you don't use the object accusative with esti and iĝi (and words that end in -iĝi) because these verbs do not deal with transitivity - the predicative is referring back to the subject (kiu fariĝas kuracisto? - Mi, ne aliulo).

Perhaps you see that the accusative case often comes right after a verb, and are trying to generalise. But the real issue is (in)transitivity.

(This sort of thing is so much easier to explain to Slavs...)

bryku (Mostrar o perfil) 16 de outubro de 2015 06:33:40

sudanglo:
Ekrigardu tra fendeto kaj sciiĝu ĉion
Zamenhof was Polish Jude (at least he spoke Polish living in Warsaw for many years), so sometimes he unintentionally used Polish grammar in Esperanto sentences. This one seems to be the case. In Polish we say:

dowiedz się wszystko/wszystkiego

dowiedz się = sciiĝu (Polish się = -iĝ-)

wszystko = ĉion (accusative)

erinja (Mostrar o perfil) 16 de outubro de 2015 15:09:01

sudanglo:
However, there are some dubious examples in the Tekstaro, where the author seems to be treating the iĝ verb as being capable of taking a direct object - even the following from Z.

Ekrigardu tra fendeto kaj sciiĝu ĉion
-igx- can sometimes take a meaning similar to ek-. I'd put this in that category.

"Ekrigardu tra fendeto kaj eksciu cxion" makes perfect sense.

...having said that, no, I wouldn't use "sciigxu" in this way. But I can sort of see where it is coming from, even with no background in Polish.

De volta à parte superior