До змісту
Відповісти

Tiu vs. tio, tioj vs. tiuj + where are you going? I'm going to...

від dukemasuya, 3 липня 2009 р.

Повідомлення: 13

Мова: English

dukemasuya (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 01:09:34

I know that there have probably been a million discussions on these topics but I just need to know.

1. How do you say "this"? What is the difference between tiu and tio?
2. How do you say "those"?
3. How do you ask someone where they are going and how does that person answer? I'm getting confused because I've seen many different things n.b. hejme, hejmen etc.

Dankon!

Oŝo-Jabe (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 01:37:04

dukemasuya:I know that there have probably been a million discussions on these topics but I just need to know.

1. How do you say "this"? What is the difference between tiu and tio?
2. How do you say "those"?
3. How do you ask someone where they are going and how does that person answer? I'm getting confused because I've seen many different things n.b. hejme, hejmen etc.

Dankon!
1. You add 'ĉi' to 'tiu' or 'tio' to denote closeness: 'tiu ĉi' this, 'tio ĉi' this. The differance between 'tiu' and 'tio' is that 'tiu' is always describing a noun or implied noun, while 'tio' is a noun.

Mi ŝatas tion. I like that.
Mi ŝatas tiun muson. I like that mouse.
Mi ŝatas tion ĉi. I like this.
Mi ŝatas tiun ĉi muson. I like this mouse.
Mi ŝatas tiun. I like that one.*

*Usually a person is the implied noun here.

2. Those is 'tiuj', or 'tio'. I'm pretty sure 'tio' is never plural.

3. You can use -n to mean motion towards. So 'Mi iras hejmen', means 'I go to home', while 'Mi iras hejme' probably means something closer to 'I go at home'.

toiletdude (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 02:02:01

I believe 'tio' can be plural.

ekz-
Mi sxatas tiojn. "I like those."

This is obviously a lot more ambiguous than "tiuj _____". Or even 'tio', simply due to the nature of what you're referring to. 'Tio' could be referring to anything, whereas 'tioj' could be referring to almost everything.

I've rarely seen this, though, so I could be wrong.

ceigered (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 02:06:24

To further elaborate on Oŝo Jabe's briliiant answer, tiu is the form of tio when it directly describes a noun, more or less. Never put tio before a noun. This also affects 'kio' and 'kio' when using 'which' to join two sentences.

(PLEASE NOTE: As people have pointed out, I have quite erroneous examples. Please note the corrections! I was in a rush so I didn't concentrate at all)

I know the person which (whom) you love = Mi konas la personon kiun vi amas.

I eat this cheese which is smelly = Mi manĝas tiun fromaĝon kiu havas odoron.

I know what you like = Mi scias kion vi ŝatas (you might also get away with "mi scias tio kiu vi ŝatas", I'm not sure about that though).

=note:

I've also never seen tioj. I've used it though rido.gif, but my Esperanto is known for its nonstandardness.

And as Oŝo Jabe has said, -n at the end of -e words generally describes motion. If you don't want that there's always 'al', but -e forms tend to be cooler for some reason I haven't figured out yet (I think it's like a status symbol, if you can use -e alot instead of prepositions it indicates a good command of Esperanto).

Mi iras al lernejo = I'm going to school.
Mi iras lernejen = I'm going to school.

Sorry if I just confused things, but I hope that does help.

bbc (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 04:34:35

'Mi iras hejme' probably means something closer to 'I go at home'.
As I know, hejme is something like 'homely'

Mi iras rapide = I go quiсkly
Mi iras hejme = I go homely

I don't know what it's means. Just homely.

jchthys (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 04:34:49

We’ve talked about tioj somewhere on the forums before. I found a site which says it should be allowed, but I think that in normal standard Esperanto you don’t see it. Since tio is indefinite, it is by nature plural-ish, and tioj might not make sense, but…just use it if you feel the need. rideto.gif

Note that when referring to persons tiu, not tio, is always used.

Rohan (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 05:41:49

ceigered:I know the person which you love = Mi scias la persono kiun vi amas.

I eat this cheese which is smelly = Mi manĝas tiu fromaĝo kiu havas odoron.
In Standard Esperanto, these sentences would be:

Mi konas la personon kiun vi amas.

Mi manĝas ĉi tiun fromaĝon kiu havas odoron.

Also, does anybody ever actually say '...the person, WHICH you love?'. I reckon quite a few people would take offence at being referred to this way. '...the person, WHOM you love.' is the way to go, IMO.

languagegeek (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 06:32:20

Also, does anybody ever actually say '...the person, WHICH you love?'. I reckon quite a few people would take offence at being referred to this way. '...the person, WHOM you love.' is the way to go, IMO.
I don’t think anyone would be offended, it’s just poor grammar. You would write, in a formal situation, “the person whom you love,” but “whom” is very rarely used in colloquial English, at least where I live. Other acceptable forms are “the person that you love,” or “the person you love”. Of course, using “whom” is useful here because, like kiun, it is in the accusative case.

RiotNrrd (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 07:06:16

jchthys:We’ve talked about tioj somewhere on the forums before. I found a site which says it should be allowed, but I think that in normal standard Esperanto you don’t see it.
I seemed to recall reading somewhere that "tioj" wasn't allowed. However, in trying to confirm that, I not only couldn't find that rule mentioned anywhere, I did find in "Step By Step In Esperanto" (paragraph 52b; page 23, at the bottom) that it is mentioned as being a logical construction, and an example is given. It doesn't say that it should not be used.

So, although I've never used it, at least one of my sources implies pretty clearly that it's legitimate (as is also "kioj", which is also part of the example).

mnlg (Переглянути профіль) 3 липня 2009 р. 07:38:56

Suggested reading:

http://www.esperanto.mv.ru/Cetero/ioj.html

In short, Zamenhof's idea is that "tio" (and "kio") does not mark an object. It marks a mental image, an abstract idea, an explanation, a concept. Because of this, it knows no singular nor plural. This is why "kioj", even though a proper form, makes little sense.

Pokrovskij has a different opinion, which does carry some weight. Unfortunately I do not have time right now to translate the whole article, but perhaps someone else can.

Назад до початку