Til indholdet
Svare

Translation help . . .

af Jonatano, 5. feb. 2016

Meddelelser: 23

Sprog: English

Luib (Vise profilen) 9. feb. 2016 16.49.04

Would it be possible to say "Ne venos", as the subject is clear from context ?

Vestitor (Vise profilen) 9. feb. 2016 19.29.42

Where is the value in missing out the subject? Just two letters and one syllable?

Tsahraf (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 07.53.57

Vestitor:You can't have faras and amas in a sentence together like that. A second verb would be in the infinitive form.
So it would be:
"He loves."
"He does love."
"Li amas."
"Li faras ami."

That makes more sense.

Kirilo81 (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 08.26.25

Tsahraf:
So it would be:
"He loves."
"He does love."
"Li amas."
"Li faras ami."

That makes more sense.
No, it is still wrong. Most languages simply don't have a construction do + infinitive for emphasizing.
If you want to translate He does love into E-o, you have to use a modifying adverb, like li vere / ja / ege / tre amas.

BTW: ami is not used like English love in the sense of "like", or only if you really really want to emphasize the liking, so "li amas aŭtojn" already is something like "he really does like cars".

Vestitor (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 11.09.25

Yes, even in English do doesn't arise unless it is negation or stressed affirmation.

I think this sort of does rendered in Esperanto is ja (indeed)...yes?

Ŝi ja volas iri al la bulo = she does want to go to the ball.

Li ja amas ŝin = He does (indeed) love her.

I'm happy to be corrected.

Sepe (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 12.54.35

I'm far from a spertulo, but I think the reply "Li ne" to the question "Kial li amas tion?" mimics English grammar too closely, to the point that it'd be very confusing to native speakers of languages without an auxiliary verb working like English to do. Note the auxiliary, in the English short answer "He doesn't", stands for the main verb in the question, together with the object (loves that), but Esperanto "Li ne" has no such element. Unless you think in English, or in English-influenced Esperanto, you'd tend to interpret ne as denying the pronoun li, which could mean 'He isn't the one who loves that', but also something like 'Don't ask me about him; ask about someone else'.

Therefore, I'd say, "Li ne amas tion". As long as it may seem to English speakers, there are languages, like Spanish and Portuguese, in which the standard way to make such a reply includes all that info, even colloquially, and it'd sound jarring otherwise.

Miland (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 15.39.22

We have Mi ne. and Li ne. in the tekstaro, and the context is usually contrasting the pronoun with another where the action is explained. Here the question provides us with that context.
The point about resembling English is well-taken, and perhaps Li ne amas tion would be easier, but maybe usage, actual or potential, should be allowed to have a voice. Given that se ne ("if that is not the case/does not happen" ) can be used, if Li ne. were to catch on, or be already in use at international Esperanto gatherings, I wouldn't object to it.

Abeneezer (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 16.32.47

Tsahraf:"He does not" would be "Li ne faras" would it not?

And "Li ne amas" would be "He loves not."

Would "Why does he love that?" be more exactly translated "Kial faras li amas tion?"?

And "Kial li amas tion?" would be more like "Why loves he that?"

In other words, would the difference between:
"He loves that."
and
"He does love that."
be indicated by "faras"?

Like
"Li amas tion."
"Li faras amas tion."
In my experience the english use of the verb 'to do' isn't easily translated into esperanto, but you can still make translation capturing the meaning. Besides, when translating EO -> EN the 'to do' verb suddenly appears again. In esperanto do and is are usually rendered in the main verb. Take the question 'Ĉu vi diris tion' and translate it to english - whoopsie - 'Why did you say that' and now the 'do' is back. In short you don't need to translate them, just translate the main verb carrying the actual action. I can understand the tendency to use 'fari' but as far as I understand that is only for when you actually do stuff.

erinja (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 16.48.29

This construction is not just English. I use it in Italian, and I did a quick Google to make sure that my usage isn't totally strange. I quickly found this headline on some kind of interpersonal relations website: "Lei vuole il terzo figlio, lui no" ( "She wants a third child, he doesn't" - literally, "She wants the third son, he no" ). A similar headline: "Psicologia: il sondaggio, se lui tradisce è giustificabile, lei no" (Psychology: the poll, if he cheats it's justifiable, she no" ). Obviously what we mean is "if he cheats it's justifiable, if she does, it isn't", but using much shorter language. The construction is found again in the first sentence of the article, "Ancora oggi per molti italiani l'uomo che tradisce è giustificabile, la donna no." (Still today, for many Italians, the man who cheats is justifiable, the woman no).

Similar in French - "Je l'aime mais elle non" ( "I love her but she doesn't" ), or a slightly more complicated sentence also pulled from a French website, "Je suis amoureux d'une fille mais elle non" ("I'm in love with a girl but she doesn't" )

It's informal language for sure, you wouldn't put it in your dissertation or in a serious news headline, but it sounds normal in context, in ordinary spoken language, and I think enough European languages have it, other than English, to make it perfectly understandable in Esperanto, particularly since Esperanto frequently looks to Romance languages when deciding how to put things together.

Maybe beginners want to speak in more complete sentences but I couldn't call it wrong when someone used an informal expression in informal speech, which like the sentences above, is something less than complete.

nornen (Vise profilen) 10. feb. 2016 17.34.21

erinja:This construction is not just English. I use it in Italian, and I did a quick Google to make sure that my usage isn't totally strange. I quickly found this headline on some kind of interpersonal relations website: "Lei vuole il terzo figlio, lui no" ( "She wants a third child, he doesn't" - literally, "She wants the third son, he no" ). A similar headline: "Psicologia: il sondaggio, se lui tradisce è giustificabile, lei no" (Psychology: the poll, if he cheats it's justifiable, she no" ). Obviously what we mean is "if he cheats it's justifiable, if she does, it isn't", but using much shorter language. The construction is found again in the first sentence of the article, "Ancora oggi per molti italiani l'uomo che tradisce è giustificabile, la donna no." (Still today, for many Italians, the man who cheats is justifiable, the woman no).
I strongly doubt that these Italian examples are comparable to the original question.
Q: "Why does he love that?"
A: "He doesn't."
In this example we are talking about negating a sentence and nothing more.
All the Italian examples are about contrasting one subject to another. If Italian works only remotely like Spanish, then these examples are really unrelated. Compare Spanish:

Negation (Does he love that? - No, he doesn't.):
- ¿Lo ama?
= No. or No lo ama. or No, no lo ama. but never: Él no.

Negation (Does your father have a car? - No, he hasn't/doesn't.):
- ¿Tu padre tiene carro?
= No. or No tiene. or No, no tiene. but never: Él no.

Contrast (She loves that and he loves that, too. - She does, but he doesn't.):
- Ella lo ama y él también lo ama.
= Ella sí, pero él no. (Ŝi ja, tamen li ne.)

Contrast (your last example):
Hoy todavía para muchos italianos, el varón adúltero (sí) es justificable, la mujer no.

Tilbage til start