Til indholdet
Svare

Translation Needed

af ailebol, 31. jul. 2009

Meddelelser: 8

Sprog: English

ailebol (Vise profilen) 31. jul. 2009 16.19.03

According to "The Esperanto Teacher", You would have been washed is:
Vi estus lavita. How would you translate - You should have been washed?

jchthys (Vise profilen) 31. jul. 2009 16.26.10

ailebol:According to "The Esperanto Teacher", You would have been washed is:
Vi estus lavita. How would you translate - You should have been washed?
Vi devus esti lavita.

Oŝo-Jabe (Vise profilen) 31. jul. 2009 21.12.24

jchthys:
ailebol:According to "The Esperanto Teacher", You would have been washed is:
Vi estus lavita. How would you translate - You should have been washed?
Vi devus esti lavita.
You can also say: Vi estu lavita.

jchthys (Vise profilen) 31. jul. 2009 23.08.45

Oŝo-Jabe:
jchthys:
ailebol:According to "The Esperanto Teacher", You would have been washed is:
Vi estus lavita. How would you translate - You should have been washed?
Vi devus esti lavita.
You can also say: Vi estu lavita.
That sounds more like “you should get washed [now]”.

Oŝo-Jabe (Vise profilen) 31. jul. 2009 23.27.14

jchthys:
Oŝo-Jabe:
jchthys:
ailebol:According to "The Esperanto Teacher", You would have been washed is:
Vi estus lavita. How would you translate - You should have been washed?
Vi devus esti lavita.
You can also say: Vi estu lavita.
That sounds more like “you should get washed [now]”.
From the PMEG:
PMEG:U-formo montras, ke la ago aŭ stato ne estas reala, sed dezirata, volata, ordonata aŭ celata. U-formo ne montras la tempon de la ago. Tia ago tamen kutime troviĝas en la estonteco:
In English
Translation:U-forms show, the act or state isn't real, but being dezired, being wished for, being ordered or being strived for. U-forms do not show the time of an act. The act is commonly found in the future though:
So, "Vi estu lavita" definitely means that in the view of the speaker "You should get washed" without a definite time specified for the act.

jchthys (Vise profilen) 1. aug. 2009 00.53.59

Right, but it indicates present/future time (“you must be washed”), not “you should have been washed”, right?

ceigered (Vise profilen) 1. aug. 2009 07.17.18

We're talking about 'should have' - devus. The imperative translates as 'wash (command)', not 'should have washed'.

Sorry, Osxo Jabe, but I'm going with jchthys on this one lango.gif

And I know the PMEG is loved for some reason, but seriously, I'm too tired to read into this much. -u form is for imperative, and that's it lango.gif

Rogir (Vise profilen) 2. aug. 2009 15.32.31

No, you should get washed will be translated vi estu lavata, or just vi laviĝu. Note the difference between -ata and -ita.

Tilbage til start