Ir ao conteúdo
Responder

Beginner Questions

de Winnipegis, 20 de maio de 2010

Mensagens: 38

Idioma: English

ceigered (Mostrar o perfil) 20 de maio de 2010 23:34:53

Evildela:someone just tell me to go back in my box.
I think Winnipegis meant it literally (e.g. "Esperanto was by no means anyone's language in the room, but the language was understood"), but you may continue enjoying your freedom outside your box lango.gif

Winnipegis (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 00:36:22

It's a bit confusing, so I do hope the passive voice is rare in Esperanto. I can understand the -ita and -ata adjectival verb forms but not so much the whole 'will be in a state of going to be understood' deal with -ota.

Miland (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 09:30:01

Winnipegis:It's a bit confusing..the whole 'will be in a state of going to be understood' deal with -ota.
Future Passive Particle Ending: -ota

Here's two examples:

The palace was due to be built, but the council prevented it: La palaco estis konstruota, tamen la magistrato malhelpis tion.

The palace is due to be built next year: La palaco estas konstruota venontjare.

In my view you wouldn't use estos with -ota much, but here's an example:
If the plans are approved, the palace will then be due to be built: Se oni aprobos la planojn, la palaco estos konstruota.

tommjames (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 09:35:32

not so much the whole 'will be in a state of going to be understood' deal with -ota.
If you said komprenota that just means going to be understood, it doesn't show anything about the time you will be in that state until you use the auxiliary verb esti. Here are the permutations with their translation:

estis komprenota - was going to be understood
estas komprenota - is going to be understood
estos komprenota - will be going to be understood

The third form is relatively uncommon, being an idea we rarely need to express.

Winnipegis (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 11:24:40

So, let's hope I understand this now. Again, correct me if I am wrong in grammar and vocabulary.

La romano estis skribata. The book was being written.
La romano estas skribata. The book is being written.
La romano estos skribata. The book will be in a state of being written.

La romano estis skribita. The book was written.
La romano estas skribita. The book is written.
La romano estos skribita. The book will be written.

La romano estis skribota. The book was going to be written.
La romano estas skribota. The book is going to be written.
La romano estos skribota. The book will be in the state of going to be written.

Example: La romano estis skribota, tamen la verkisto havis ne tempon.
The book was going to be written, however the author had no time.

Example #2: La romano estas skribota se la verkisto havas tempon.
The book is going to be written, if the author has time.

So, if I am correct, the adjectival verb forms mean the following:

-ata Progressive
-ita Completion
-ota Potential

If I am correct, I am actually pretty surprised at how easily I came to understand them, and can see how they would enhance my ability to communicate. This definitely motivates me.

Miland (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 12:03:10

Winnipegis:So, let's hope I understand this now...
Yes, the basic examples appear all right now. In the longer examples, you need ne, "not" before havis "have", unless you really have "no time", neniom da tempo.

You are making progress. Well done!

Bennon (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 15:52:25

Don't fall into the trap of trying to translate from English too literally. This has already been pointed out in the case of progressive verbs, but it applies to the passive as well (although less so). If the reason you would like to use the passive in a sentence is because you want the object to be spoken/written before the subject or for emphasis, don't forget Esperanto's relatively free word order. Ekz.

Active: La hundo mordas la knabon.
also Active: La knabon mordas la hundo.
These mean the same thing.

This is fairly common and much simpler than forming the passive voice, and accomplishes some of the goals.

erinja (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 16:38:56

Another, somewhat more real-world example, of what Bennon is saying:

In English, we might say "The play was written by Shakespeare to celebrate the Queen's birthday". Emphasis on the play.

In Esperanto, we can put the play first (and thus emphasize it, as Bennon mentioned) by word order: "La teatraĵon skribis Shakespeare por festi la naskiĝtagon de la reĝino"

darkweasel (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 18:32:49

I fully agree with you that the passive voice doesn't need to be used that often in Esperanto.

In English, it is frequently used for two reasons: First, English has no accusative which means that you need it to emphasize something. Second, it has no commonly used equivalent to oni - "they" and "you" are often used but they literally mean something else, and "one" isn't commonly used.

In the last two paragraphs, I used the passive voice three times, and now look how I'd write this in Esperanto:
Mi plene konsentas kun vi, ke oni ne devas uzi la pasivon tiel ofte en Esperanto.

En la angla, oni ofte uzas ĝin pro du kialoj: Unue, la angla ne havas akuzativon, kio signifas, ke ĝi necesas por emfazi ion. Due, ĝi ne havas ofte uzatan ekvivalenton de oni - oni ofte uzas "they" kaj "you", sed ili laŭlitere signifas ion alian, kaj oni malemas uzi "one".

Avoid the passive voice wherever possible - you have oni and you have a free word order, so you shouldn't need it.

horsto (Mostrar o perfil) 21 de maio de 2010 20:39:22

darkweasel:
Avoid the passive voice wherever possible - you have oni and you have a free word order, so you shouldn't need it.
I don't understand why you are giving this advice. You often don't have to use the passive voice, if you don't like it, that's right. But why should anybody avoid it wherever possible?
And, of course, oni sentences not always have the same meaning as passive voice sentences.

De volta à parte superior