Mesaĝoj: 20
Lingvo: English
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-20 10:17:29
That seems to be using the conditional + participle in English. But I've only seen past, present, future + participle in Esperanto courses.
Can I translate the English sentence Esperantishly (to use the adverb that Esperanto seems so fond of!) as, "Se via pico estus manĝita, infano, mi ne devus plendanta nun"?
If not how would you translate this without losing the relatively 'pithy', aloof tone of the original given by this relatively uncommon (even in English) combination of verb forms?
Nick
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-20 13:31:23
Thanks
Nick
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-20 19:16:16
I haven't seen any "lerni paroli", double infinitive forms in Esperanto. Can one say that and be properly understood, or is there a better way to go about saying it?
Nick
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-21 00:04:44
waxle:Also, do you need to say the "how to speak" part? If it's not nessecary, why even bother say it?Well, the "to speak" part was necessary in the context of something I was trying to say to a Polish person in Esperanto. Hungarian has a reputation of being hard to learn to speak, but it is phonetic in its spelling (so I've been given to understand), thus it is easy to learn to write.
On the other hand, English (another language that this person is also trying to learn apart from Esperanto) has at least a few redeeming features in learning to speak it, but the spelling is a complete bitch.
Nick
erinja (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-21 05:01:50
nw2394:In English I can say (as a possibly annoyed parent), "If your pizza would/had have eaten, child, I would not have to be complaining now!".Waxle is more or less right about the traditionalists versus word builders. I happen to be on the "word-building" side of things. However, I can tell you that in colloquial use, the -itus ending is not really that common. I have personally used "mangxintus" ("would have eaten") many, many times. But I don't think I've ever seen "mangxitus", and I would never use it. It just sounds weird to me. I would always say "estus mangxita". There's no grammatical reason that springs to mind, why this should be, but I personally wouldn't really use it, perhaps because conditionals usually seem to be active voice and not passive.
Can I translate the English sentence Esperantishly (to use the adverb that Esperanto seems so fond of!) as, "Se via pico estus manĝita, infano, mi ne devus plendanta nun"?
Regarding "ne devus plendanta" - that part is incorrect. It translates as "wouldn't have to complaining" which isn't grammatical in English, either. I would say "ne devus plendi" ("wouldn't have to complain") or "ne estus plendanta" ("wouldn't be complaining"). Or if you really wanted to say "wouldn't have to be complaining", that would be "ne devus esti plendanta"
erinja (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-21 05:12:37
nw2394:Now I have another question, what about double infinitives? For example, "Hungarian is one the hardest languages to learn to speak".Double infinitives are allowed. You most commonly see them with povi, devi, or voli as one of verbs (this is also the case in English, by the way). So for instance, a sentence like "Mi esperas povi iri al la kinejo" is perfectly common ("I hope to be able to go to the cinema").
I haven't seen any "lerni paroli", double infinitive forms in Esperanto. Can one say that and be properly understood, or is there a better way to go about saying it?
Nick
In the case of your example sentence, I can't see anything immediately grammatically wrong with it, but it sounds really strange to me, to end a sentence like that. In many cases, including this one, there is an implied "por" in Esperanto, even when English doesn't include one. To me, this sentence sounds way better if you translate it with "por lerni paroli" than simply with "lerni paroli". But that's just me.
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-21 11:00:14
Much of the course material on the net seems to make it very easy to pick up the basics of the language. But it is, perhaps, thin on more difficult areas.
Also it seems to also be aimed at an international audience so it tends not to dwell on some things that would be difficult for the speakers of any one particular language.
Anyhow, I've found a text book now (it had to be dragged out of a store room in a library on the other side of the county). It is quite old (nearly 60 years) and not written in anything like the same style, but is littered with good examples and does seem to cover things in much more detail. So I'll be reading that now.
Thanks again.
Nick
erinja (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-21 15:40:43
nw2394:ThanksI think most people turn to grammar guides to deal with uncertainties of complicated grammar. I use the Plena Manlibro de Esperanta Gramatiko (PMEG) (www.bertilow.com/pmeg), which is also available in lernu's grammar section, in an abbreviated form. Lernu also offers "La tuta Esperanto", a fairly detailed grammar guide with exercises (but no answers) in the course section. These grammar guides are in Esperanto only; I think it is assumed that if you are interested in learning very complicated grammar, you should know enough Esperanto not to need a translation into your language.
Much of the course material on the net seems to make it very easy to pick up the basics of the language. But it is, perhaps, thin on more difficult areas.
nw2394:Yes, certainly. The sites is designed by an international team and is written in Esperanto only, then translated by volunteers to other languages. Accordingly, it's not very specific. Translators can add in additional content specific to their languages, but it's up to the translator. I added considerable extra explanations to the English version of "Ana Pana", as well as a few other small additional clarifications elsewhere in the site. The difficulty is that we serve such diverse language communities, that if you explain in minute detail every language point that some language might possibly have a hard time with, it might confuse speakers of other language. For example, not every language has a word for "the". Speakers of Slavic languages may benefit from a lengthy discussion of how to use "la", but I suspect that for most English speakers, it would confuse more than it would help.
Also it seems to also be aimed at an international audience so it tends not to dwell on some things that would be difficult for the speakers of any one particular language.
nw2394:Books are always a good thing. I like "Pasxoj al Plena Posedo" for building vocabulary and improving your grammar and reading comprehension. I also encourage you to take a look at lernu's language questions section Lingvodemandoj
Anyhow, I've found a text book now (it had to be dragged out of a store room in a library on the other side of the county). It is quite old (nearly 60 years) and not written in anything like the same style, but is littered with good examples and does seem to cover things in much more detail. So I'll be reading that now.
Thanks again.
Nick
It includes detailed explanations of some sticky grammar points, and also a link you can use to ask the lernu! team your own grammar question.
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-22 12:08:48
erinja:Thanks again for all your help.
Lingvodemandoj
It includes detailed explanations of some sticky grammar points, and also a link you can use to ask the lernu! team your own grammar question.
I think I've spotted a minor error. On the page about the imperative/volitive (-u ending) it says:
Ŝi aĉetu, kion ŝi bezonas. - Let her buy when she needs.
I think it should say "what" instead of "when". At least I've haven't seen anything that suggests kio is ever used in relation to time!
Nick
nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-22 13:22:38
But that isn't quite an exact understanding. Kio actually means "what generally" and kiu means "what specifically". So how do I begin a question with "who or what specifically"? As in, for example, a marketing survey question for a product that is supposed to deliver cleanliness, one might ask "who or what would represent 'purity'.
I promise this is an actual survey question I asked many years ago when I worked in marketing and I was looking for a specific person (maybe a celebrity), perhaps an object, or maybe a role - as in someone with a particular uniform or recognisable profession - or it could have been a place.
What we were after were good ideas for artwork that people in general would associate, in this case, with the idea of purity.
In English I can say "who or what" and it illicits the exact response I was looking for.
In Esperanto I can say "Kiu aŭ kio", but I don't mean "What specifically or what generally"?
I might ask "Kiu persono aŭ kio objekto" but that might stop people from answering with places. And the answer to my survey question, (the one that came up most frequently) was a mountain waterfall.
I can't get this straight in my head about how to ask "who or what" in a succinct way and it is bugging me. Would "kiu aŭ kio" be understood by a non english speaking esperantist in the same way that an English speaker understands "Who or what"? Or would "kiu" on its own be adequate?
Nick