Žinutės: 13
Kalba: English
Alkanadi (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 06:06:59
I hear robins singing in the trees.
Mi aŭdas rubekolojn kanti en la arboj.
Is this a better translation:
Mi aŭdas kantadon de rubekoloj en la arboj.
Evildela (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 08:46:03
Vestitor (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 11:03:24
johmue (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 11:29:28
Alkanadi:This sentence seems awkward to me. Is it correct?It depends on whether you are focusing on the birds or on the birds' singing.
I hear robins singing in the trees.
Mi aŭdas rubekolojn kanti en la arboj.
Is this a better translation:
Mi aŭdas kantadon de rubekoloj en la arboj.
Miland (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 13:34:11
johmue (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 14:25:10
Miland:I don't think you can use an I-word as an adjective (though if there are good examples in the tekstaro, by all means let us know). You could have Mi aŭdas rubekolo(j)n kantanta(j)n or Mi aŭdas rubekolan kantadon.You can according to PMEG.
nornen (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 11 d. 15:49:21
Miland:I don't think you can use an I-word as an adjective (though if there are good examples in the tekstaro, by all means let us know). You could have Mi aŭdas rubekolo(j)n kantanta(j)n or Mi aŭdas rubekolan kantadon.You are right, you cannnot use a verb as an adjective.
However in the sentence "Mi aŭdas rubekolojn kanti en la arboj." the verb kanti is neither an adjective nor is it an attribute of "rubekolojn". In this sentence "kanti" is the predicate of the verbal phrase "rubekolojn kanti en la arboj", being "rubekolojn" its subject and "en la arboj" an adverbial of place. Now "rubekolojn" marks accusative, because the whole phrase is the direct object of "aŭdas". This kind of construction is common in most (all?) indoeuropean languages and it is standard Esperanto, too.
Zamenhof:Ho, Marion, ke mi denove aŭdas vin paroli.Which is a better sentence?
Now the following might just be an erroneous influence from Spanish, but maybe other speakers share my perception. I think the two sentences are semantically different:
A) Mi aŭdas la birdojn kanti.
B) Mi aŭdas la birdojn kantantajn.
I personally think that A) is the same as "Mi aŭdas, ke la birdoj kantas" while B) is the same as "Mi aŭdas la birdojn, kiuj kantas" (Or syntactically: "la birdojn kanti" is a verbal phrase, while "la birdojn kantantajn" is a nominal phrase).
A) Mi vidas la knabojn manĝi, tamen mi ne vidas la knabojn ludi.
B) Mi vidas la knabojn manĝantajn, tamen mi ne vidas la knabojn ludantajn.
A) means -according to me-, that I see that the boys are eating but I cannot see that they are playing. Maybe nobody is playing at all.
B) means -according to me-, that there are two groups of boys. Some are eating and some are playing. However I can only see those who are eating, but I cannot see those who are playing.
Miland (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 12 d. 17:54:09
tommjames (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 12 d. 22:57:07
Alkanadi:This sentence seems awkward to me. Is it correct?Yes, this is perfectly normal and correct Esperanto.
I hear robins singing in the trees.
Mi aŭdas rubekolojn kanti en la arboj.
Alkanadi:Is this a better translation:It's fine but to me the first is more natural. I agree with johmue, that it just depends whether you want to put the emphasis on the birds or their singing. But you probably won't care about that most of the time, so just use whichever feels more natural to you.
Mi aŭdas kantadon de rubekoloj en la arboj.
Out of interest why do you find the first form awkward?
Miland (Rodyti profilį) 2016 m. vasaris 13 d. 08:56:57
nornen:This kind of construction is .. standard Esperanto..If that is so, we might expect to find it in print. Can you give me a few good examples from the tekstaro? Or a reference to one of the Krestomatioj?
I wondered why it made me uneasy till I realised that it could be a naciismo, quite meaningful to someone thinking in national languages (like English) which use such a construction, but not necessarily good Esperanto.