ceigered:Amazing, so basically when used with 'esti', you can only use '-anta' and not '-inta' etc otherwise it doesn't quite make sense?

What happens with 'estis leganta' vs. 'estis leginta'?

sorry if I'm helping to propel this thread further off topic

No you can use either.

Mi estis leginta = I had read
Mi estis leganta = I was reading
Mi estis legonta = I was going/about to read

Mi estas leginta = I have read
Mi estas leganta = I am reading
Mi estas legonta = I am going/about to read

Mi estos leginta = I will have read
Mi estos leganta = I will be reading
Mi estos legonta = I will be going/about to read

Mi estus leginta = I would have read
Mi estus leganta = I would be reading
Mi estus legonta = I would be going/about to read

All these forms can theoretically be shortened by removing the auxiliary verb, resulting in:

Mi legintis = I had read
Mi legantis = I was reading
Mi legontis = I was going/about to read

Mi legintas = I have read
Mi legantas = I am reading
Mi legontas = I am going/about to read

Mi legintos = I will have read
Mi legantos = I will be reading
Mi legontos = I will be going/about to read

Mi legintus = I would have read
Mi legantus = I would be reading
Mi legontus = I would be going/about to read

Such shortenings don't happen that much though, with the intus forms being the most popular according to PMEG.

All tommjames said, including the passive voice:

Mi estis legita = I had been read
Mi estis legata = I was being read
Mi estis legota = I was about to be read

...

Ah right, now it makes sense.

So when using -inta, esti basically replaces the English use of 'have'.

But anyway the English translations help a lot, it can get very confusing trying to work it out exclusively from the Esperanto side of things. In any case I've now got a lot more verb forms to play around with (although like normal I might stick to just legas, legis and legos when possible).

ceigered:Ah right, now it makes sense.

Yay!

So when using -inta, esti basically replaces the English use of 'have'.

"have" functions as an auxiliary verb in those examples.

(although like normal I might stick to just legas, legis and legos when possible).

Precisely. Compound verb tenses are relatively rare, commonly used only when you feel it important to convey time and state of the action separately or with more detail.

Wow look what I started

Thanks for the help though, and to be honest the whole -ante, -inte, onte thing has been on my mind too.

FourSpeed:

Also "por la gajno" = "for the win" or "FTW!"
Even though I'm a Brit, living in the USA, I find that phrase both weird and just plain bad English.

You see "FTW" all the time in internet gaming forums. As a purely speculative guess at origin, I'd point the finger at the old US TV show "Hollywood Squares".

For those who don't know, it was an X & O gameshow where the boxes had a celebrity sitting inside. The celebrity whose square was chosen would answer a question and the contestant would have to identify whether the answer given was true or not to "mark" that square with their X (or O).

So, you would frequently hear a contestant say "Paul Lynde for the win" or "Joan Rivers for the block".

ZOMG is purely hyperbolic usage of OMG as you note.

Regards,
4

PS> To the OP, "kio okazas" is what I've seen, but I'm pretty new to Esperanto.

Oh, that was such a cool gameshow! I watched in the 70s when I was growing up here in California. Paul Lynde was funny.

Ironchef:I read that "ZOMG!" is just the same of "OMG!" but with more emphasis. Where do people get these from?

Here is a website that may provide a helpful explanation.