Al la enhavo

Accusative of Direction

de Alkanadi, 2016-majo-18

Mesaĝoj: 41

Lingvo: English

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 14:50:27

Alkanadi:So Kellerman made a mistake. I didn't see that one coming...
Neither did Kellerman, quite possibly. It would be a mistake from our present point of view. His is a very old textbook from the earliest days of the movement, when ci was still current. The other example you found was a quote from a conversation, and so might reflect a looser use of the language.

It is now safe to say: if it doesn't have a name ending -o, no matter what it is, use al to indicate movement towards it, not the accusative.

Alkanadi (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 15:10:44

Miland:
Alkanadi:So Kellerman made a mistake. I didn't see that one coming...
It is now safe to say: if it doesn't have a name ending -o, no matter what it is, use al to indicate movement towards it, not the accusative.
Thanks. I will go with that. That makes it easy.

Just one small monkey wrench to throw into the machine:
erinja:A restaurant is a place.
restoracion <--- A place according to Erinja.
ĝardenon <--- Not a place according to Miland.

This is why I ask these questions. Everyone thinks their own answer is self-evident. One person says, obviously a garden is a place. Another person will say the opposite. Then the one asking the question is seen as a trouble maker when they are innocently trying to iron out some inconsistencies. You can't win.

externalImage.png

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 15:37:32

Alkanadi:ĝardenon <--- Not a place according to Miland.
That is not accurate. I said that a garden does not count as a named place if it does not have a name (2016-05-19 8:59:04). Even then it wouldn't be eligible for the accusative if the name did not end in -o. Even in that case I would probably prefer to use al to indicate movement towards it, since using a name to refer to a location is not something we usually do except for dwelt areas like towns, or (just possibly) a very famous building or estate.

thyrolf (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 16:40:46

Ili sin ame rigardis, kore enprofundiĝis, komencis sin movi, turneti, turni, danci - dancadis feliĉen.

it's an example of accusativ! i try to translate (not sure i'm able to do it correctly): they locked at each other, deepening in their hearts, started to move, to turn, turn around, dance - danced into their happiness.

Vestitor (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 17:05:33

thyrolf:Ili sin ame rigardis, kore enprofundiĝis, komencis sin movi, turneti, turni, danci - dancadis feliĉen.
English or English translations alongside Esperanto are required here.

lagtendisto (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-19 17:28:53

dbob:
spreecamper:Example of 'al'-movement: 'Do ni povas iri al tien.'
He didn't say "al tien". He said: "Do ni povas iri aŭ tien, aŭ tien."
"Al" by itself already shows movement and you don't use the accusative N after it.
If I say "mi iros al tien" that would mean "mi iros al al tie" ---> Rolvortetoj, kiuj mem montras direkton.
Thanks, dbob. I really missed that. Thanks for that hint. Short time I was wondering about combination of 'al tien'. But then I thought, okay Evildela, obviously he is KER C1 level speaker, so it could be some kind of emphasis to use 'al tien' ('al al' ). I assume that I confused it with Lidepla -bu- verb repetition particle and made it bias for Esperanto, too. In result, I didn't listen with full mental energy. I have to improve that. Lesson learnt okulumo.gif

Furthermore, in my opinion that 'aux' also sounds little bit like English 'ehm'.

Alkanadi (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-22 07:02:58

To more clearly illustrate the issue, please see the following. Both Erinja and Miland are good speakers. Erinja says that the first sentence is proper because a restaurant is a place. Miland says that the second sentence is a mistake. I consider both these people experts.

Li, doktoro, tiel vestite venis restoracion...
erinja:A restaurant is a place.
Li iris ĝardenon.
Miland:
Alkanadi:Is this a mistake?
Li iris ĝardenon.
Yes...

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-25 08:52:31

It may be a matter of evolution. The quotes from Kellerman and from the translation of the novel The Master and Margerita (of conversational language) may both reflect older usage. As PMEG 12.2.5 indicates, we have come to use the accusative only for named places ending in -o and even then, not often.

Kirilo81 (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-25 09:22:11

La Majstro kaj Maragarita is q quite recent book.
If there is any language change going on with the accusative of direction, then it is the loss of the bare accusative in favor of the directional adverb: Mi iros urbon -> Mi iros urben (although they don't mean the same, originally).

I don't see why Mi iras ĝardenon should be wrong, a garden is a place, too (although not the most typical one and not a proper name, so the expression would be stylistically marked).

Alkanadi (Montri la profilon) 2016-majo-25 09:50:39

Kirilo81:I don't see why Mi iras ĝardenon should be wrong...
Other people will disagree with you.

The problem is this. If ĝardenon is a place then anything can be a place by extension. A garden is a place where you grow food. A table is a place where you eat.

How do we define a place?

Each side holds their own position as self-evident and obvious. Too bad nobody can explain this discrepancy. I must be the first one in history to discover it.

Reen al la supro