Viestejä: 99
Kieli: English
Roberto12 (Näytä profiilli) 16. syyskuuta 2010 21.33.19
erinja:I normally consider the -u form without a pronoun to be a command, and the -u form with a pronoun to be a suggestion.I think something sturdier than tone of voice or exclamation marks is needed here to make the distinction - either that or just accept that it's a universal rule that the u suffix is both imperative and optative.
Petu al via kuracisto. - Ask your doctor (command).
Vi petu al via kuracisto. - You should ask your doctor (suggestion)
I believed enda to be the Eo gerundive, i.e. meaning "will, must, or should". If I'm wrong about that, well, then I'm wrong.
tommjames (Näytä profiilli) 16. syyskuuta 2010 21.38.36
Roberto12:for "we should go away" we could say ni endas iri for or ni estas irendaj for or ni estas forirendaj.When -end and -ind are used as suffixes the meaning is always passive, e.g. pagenda = to be paid, evitinda = worth avoiding. So "ni estas irendaj" means we must be gone, or rather, someone must go us. Doesn't really make sense.
It works the same with -ebl too; farebla = doable, not "able to do" or "might do".
darkweasel (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 4.53.56
hirs (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 6.16.10
mi ne regas la anglan tiel bone, ke mi diskutu en gxi kun plezuro. Sed diskuti pri gxi mi povas.
Mi tradukus nepelmele kaj (laux mi) nepre klare jenan propozicion:
"I should go to the doctor to pay my tick."
cxi-maniere:
"Mi opinias mian devon iri al la kuracisto (por) pagi mian sxuldon."
Cxu gxi klaras kaj al la angloparolantoj aux denaskaj aux nur sole spertaj?
Roberto12 (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 9.14.26
tommjames:Okay. I've struckthrough what I wrote in my previous but one post.Roberto12:for "we should go away" we could say ni endas iri for or ni estas irendaj for or ni estas forirendaj.When -end and -ind are used as suffixes the meaning is always passive, e.g. pagenda = to be paid, evitinda = worth avoiding. So "ni estas irendaj" means we must be gone, or rather, someone must go us. Doesn't really make sense.
It works the same with -ebl too; farebla = doable, not "able to do" or "might do".
You know, I think I'll just used devus à la the French, or perhaps even devu.
I want to add that the need can arise for a distinction between the imperative and the optative, e.g. "We should return these books to the library, but let's not." At this moment in time I can think of 3 ways to render this in Eo:
1. Ni devus redoni ĉi-tiujn librojn al la biblioteko, sed ni ne redonu ilin.
2. Mi opinias ke ni redonu ĉi-tiujn librojn al la biblioteko, sed ni ne redonu ilin.
1. Ni redonu ĉi-tiujn librojn al la biblioteko. Ne, ni ne redonu ilin.
(Remark: in Volapük you have imperative and optative forms of the verb, plus a verb meaning "should" or "be duty bound".)
ceigered (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 9.51.40
hirs:Mi pensus ke tia frazo ne estas komprenebla...
"Mi opinias mian devon iri al la kuracisto (por) pagi mian sxuldon."
Eble:
"Mi pensas ke mi devas iri al la kuracisto por pagi mian sxuldon"...
Norme, mi uzas "opinii" kun "ke" frazo. Kiel:
"Mi opinias ke ĉiuj en la mondo devas iri al festego"
(Mi havas opinion, kaj la opinio estas ke ĉiuj homoj en la mondo devas iri al grandan festo).
----
I would think that that sort of sentence isn't understandable.
Maybe:
"Mi pensas ke mi devas iri al la kuracisto por pagi mian sxuldon"...
Normally, I use "opinii" with "ke" phrases, like:
"Mi opinias ke ĉiuj en la mondo devas iri al festego"
(Mi havas opinion, kaj la opinio estas ke ĉiuj homoj en la mondo devas iri al grandan festo).
----
(Mi bedaŭregas se mi ne pravas!)
horsto (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 14.26.52
Roberto12: "We should return these books to the library, but let's not."What do you want to say? If I correctly understand the english sentence, then you know that you have to return the books to the library, but you propose to don't do that. If that's right, then I propose:
Ni devus redoniThere is not need at all to use -us, you know that you have to do it. Only use -us if there exist alternatives. Therefore:
Ni devas (aŭ devos) redoni
ĉi-tiujnPlease don't use a dash here.
Alltogether I would write:
Ni devos redoni ĉi tiujn librojn, sed ni ne faru tion.
2. Mi opinias ke ni redonuNo need to speak about your opinion here.
1. Ni redonu ĉi-tiujn librojnI think it's difficult for the native english speaking people. Alltough you say "We should return" this in fact means "We have to return". Therefore you can't translate this with "Ni redonu ...". The meaning of "ni redonu la librojn" is more like: Let us return the books.
lencxjo (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 15.09.50
Roberto12 (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 15.18.42
horsto:I mean "ought to". For example, I might know that someone else wants to borrow the books, so even though I'm entitled to extend my loan, it would be kind to return them. "Devi" thus isn't right.Roberto12: "We should return these books to the library, but let's not."What do you want to say? If I correctly understand the english sentence, then you know that you have to return the books to the library, but you propose to don't do that.
Thinking about this stuff, I wonder if it's the same as the situation regarding the absence of a suffix denoting the abstract noun of verbal actions ("-tion" in English). That is, instead of having the word itself, you use one of several workaround options.
horsto (Näytä profiilli) 17. syyskuuta 2010 16.37.06
Roberto12:I mean "ought to". For example, I might know that someone else wants to borrow the books, so even though I'm entitled to extend my loan, it would be kind to return them. "Devi" thus isn't right.OK, in this case you really should use "devus".
lenĉjo:I appreciate the comments from those from "Deutschland" (DE) and remember that one of the foundational languages of Zamenhof was German—that is, what he thought in sometimes.I always think that there are a lot of things similar in Esperanto and german, but perhaps people from other languages have the same feeling.