შინაარსის ნახვა

How to translate 'for'.

Wilhelm-ისა და 28 მარტი, 2008-ის მიერ

შეტყობინებები: 15

ენა: English

Taciturn_ (მომხმარებლის პროფილი) 28 მარტი, 2008 20:15:12

Taciturn_:Ohhh , bloody rules ridulo.gif , i see things get worse with this :
---------------------------
N-finaĵo estas sufiĉe ofte uzata por montri pozicion de parto (ofte korpoparto). Oni povas diri, ke N anstataŭas la rolvorteton kun. Tia N-komplemento ĉiam kunlaboras kun esprimo de pozicio aŭ direkto:

Ĉu vi permesos al mi pendigi tiun ĉi kanajlon sub la ĉielo la kapon malsupren?Rt.70 = ...kun la kapo malsupren.

Ĉu vi pensas, ke Dio permesos, ke unu sola homo [...] renversu ĉion la supron malsupren.Rt.130

Li falis vizaĝon al la tapiŝo.

Oni povus ankaŭ diri, ke havante, tenante, metinte aŭ simile estas subkomprenata. Tiam temas pri objekto:

Li sidis (havante) la brakojn kunmetitaj.

Li haltis dum momento, (tenante) la kapon klinita iom flanken.

Se la posta pozicia esprimo estas A-vorto (klinita, kunmetitaj), ĝi ne havu N-finaĵon, ĉar ĝi estas perverba priskribo de la objekto, kvankam la verbo (en participa formo) estas subkomprenata.

---------------------------------------
to make things clear what i meant about "worse".
this example:
Li sidis (havante) la brakojn kunmetitaj

it can only be allowed for use, to my mind, if we put "," after "Li sidis" , this way:
Li sidis,la brakojn kunmetitaj.

otherwise i could as well understand it like : he sits on his hands.

Anyhow this mess with using akuzativon and prepositions, just as it is in natural languages needs good fixing

erinja (მომხმარებლის პროფილი) 28 მარტი, 2008 23:06:36

Taciturn_:
Anyhow this mess with using akuzativon and prepositions, just as it is in natural languages needs good fixing
Why does it need fixing?

I think things are fine how they are. Use of the accusative and prepositions becomes much clearer once you start thinking in terms of the words that are missing from the sentence. In most cases, by adding a couple of missing words, it becomes clear why the grammar is the way it is.

For example, "Mi neniam vidis lin malfeliĉa" - if you make that "Mi neniam vidis lin [esti] malfeliĉa", then the presence of "esti" makes it clear that "malfeliĉa" shouldn't have the -n ending.

eb.eric (მომხმარებლის პროფილი) 28 მარტი, 2008 23:28:02

sergejm:
eb.eric:Yes! http://bertilow.com/pmeg/gramatiko/rolmontriloj/n/...
But there are no examples with -iĝi!
They can think -iĝi iun/ion to be misspelling of -igi iun/ion!
There are...

Li [...] ŝanceliĝis kelkajn paŝojn returne.[BV.61] = ...per/je kelkaj paŝoj...

I don't think -iĝ- has anything to do with it.

mnlg (მომხმარებლის პროფილი) 29 მარტი, 2008 00:00:07

eb.eric:I don't think -iĝ- has anything to do with it.
True. Measurement can be expressed with the accusative (li altas du metrojn, tio pezas dek kilogramojn, etc).

Taciturn_ (მომხმარებლის პროფილი) 29 მარტი, 2008 06:19:11

erinja:
Taciturn_:
Anyhow this mess with using akuzativon and prepositions, just as it is in natural languages needs good fixing
Why does it need fixing?

I think things are fine how they are. Use of the accusative and prepositions becomes much clearer once you start thinking in terms of the words that are missing from the sentence. In most cases, by adding a couple of missing words, it becomes clear why the grammar is the way it is.

For example, "Mi neniam vidis lin malfeliĉa" - if you make that "Mi neniam vidis lin [esti] malfeliĉa", then the presence of "esti" makes it clear that "malfeliĉa" shouldn't have the -n ending.
As Esperanto is not my first language (it was Latin ),so i find no troubles with using and understanding such sentences.

ზემოთ დაბრუნება