訊息: 11
語言: English
Cary (顯示個人資料) 2007年1月22日下午1:46:33
You will use ke to link two parts of a sentence that could form two distinct sentences of their own simply by removing the word that, example :
I know that you can do that -> I know. You can do that.
You cannot do the same with the 2 examples you gave :
The boy. He lived. aren't two valid sentences : the first one means nothing, and the second doesn't clearly relate to the boy.
carnifex (顯示個人資料) 2007年1月22日下午3:09:41
In your cases it would be:
"La knabo, kiu vivas"
"La frukto, kiu fuŝas"
Of course, in these simple cases you can do without "kiu" at all, just use the participles:
"La vivanta knabo"
"La fuŝanta frukto"
awake (顯示個人資料) 2007年1月22日下午6:37:26
pastorant:Wouldn't you say:
La frukto, kiu putras
instead of
La frukto kiu fuŝas?
La frukto, kiu fuŝas sounds like "The fruit which messes things up"
erinja (顯示個人資料) 2007年1月22日下午8:09:44
awake:Yes, I agree with pastorant. It seems to me that fuŝi should be a transitive verb. Therefore putras is better. You could also probably get away with fuŝiĝas, but putras would be more specific.The lernu dictionary's Esperanto-only dictionary defines fuŝi as "to make something bad or to do something badly, because of lack of care (intentionally or by mistake)"
So...yeah someone would understand if you used "fuŝi" here but it wouldn't really be a correct use of "fuŝi". You'd have to word it as "Mi fuŝis la frukto-tenadon" or something.
If he asked for "The fruit that was spoiled", indeed, you're all correct! 
Cheers! 
T0dd (顯示個人資料) 2007年1月25日上午12:33:31
To return to the original question, the English word "that", as well as the Spanish word "que" can serve as either subordinating conjunction or relative pronoun. Cary explained the difference very well. For those of us whose native language uses the same word for both (very different) jobs (and English, but not Spanish, also uses it as a demonstrative adjective and pronoun), it can take a while to get used to having to use different words. It means that (sub. conj.) we have to make a distinction that (rel. pron.) we're not used to making.
