Al la enhavo
Respondi

Usage of infinitive

de Genjix, 2010-septembro-18

Mesaĝoj: 22

Lingvo: English

Genjix (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 01:42:47

Hey,

Often I see the infinitive verbs used where I would use the present tense; mostly in recursive phrases such as 'I think that you are playing' or 'Let's practise Esperanto by-means-of chatting'. Both rendered as,

Mi pensas ke vi ludas.
Ni praktiku nian esperanton per babili.

Where would I use and not use the infinitive? Could I have some rules for it's usage in all cases?

Thanks

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 08:26:22

One rule you need to observe is that Esperanto is somewhat restrictive in the prepositions it will allow in front of an infinitive.

So far, 'per babili' would not be used. To express that idea say 'per babilado'.

Simpler though to say Ĉu vi volas babili iom en Esperanto.

In 'Mi pensas ke vi ludas' there is no infinitive.

If you haven't yet bookmarked PMEG, it would be a good idea to do, so as most points of Esperanto grammar are covered there.

This link will take you to a discussion of the infinitive

darkweasel (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 11:37:16

sudanglo:One rule you need to observe is that Esperanto is somewhat restrictive in the prepositions it will allow in front of an infinitive.

So far, 'per babili' would not be used. To express that idea say 'per babilado'.
Exactly - it would not be used. But it's not justified to call such an absolutely logical construction wrong and incorrect.

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 15:23:06

darkweasel:
sudanglo:One rule you need to observe is that Esperanto is somewhat restrictive in the prepositions it will allow in front of an infinitive.

So far, 'per babili' would not be used. To express that idea say 'per babilado'.
Exactly - it would not be used. But it's not justified to call such an absolutely logical construction wrong and incorrect.
Did sudanglo call it that? Even if someone did, there would be a justification: beginners should be encouraged to follow customary usage, and not attempt innovation.

ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 15:27:32

Miland:
darkweasel:
sudanglo:One rule you need to observe is that Esperanto is somewhat restrictive in the prepositions it will allow in front of an infinitive.

So far, 'per babili' would not be used. To express that idea say 'per babilado'.
Exactly - it would not be used. But it's not justified to call such an absolutely logical construction wrong and incorrect.
Did sudanglo call it that?
Perhaps Darkweasel was mentioning that to prevent a beginner from insinuating further meaning to Sudanglo's words?

Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 15:30:52

ceigered:
Miland:
darkweasel:
sudanglo:One rule you need to observe is that Esperanto is somewhat restrictive in the prepositions it will allow in front of an infinitive.

So far, 'per babili' would not be used. To express that idea say 'per babilado'.
Exactly - it would not be used. But it's not justified to call such an absolutely logical construction wrong and incorrect.
Did sudanglo call it that?
Perhaps Darkweasel was mentioning that to prevent a beginner from insinuating further meaning to Sudanglo's words?
Possibly. My response is effectively added to my previous message which I edited just before I read yours!

ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 15:49:58

Miland:
ceigered:

Perhaps Darkweasel was mentioning that to prevent a beginner from insinuating further meaning to Sudanglo's words?
Possibly. My response is effectively added to my previous message which I edited just before I read yours!
Haha, this is where Google Wave was a great idea, we would have been able to see realtime editing okulumo.gif

Anyway, I agree with your addition to your original message, from my own personal experience in "innovating Esperanto" rido.gif. Following customary usage is exceedingly useful I found in finding the boundaries of how flexible EO is before it "snaps" and people no longer have a clue about what you're trying to say, or immediately identify you as a beginner.

For Genjix:
as a general rule, I'd say that things like "per" aren't usable with verbs except in some cases which I can't think of off the top of my head being late at night and all. From my experiences:
Prepositions are normally used with noun forms of verbs, such as "babilado". Of course, it depends on the meaning of the preposition. "Per" tends to be used with nouns, so "per babilado" literally translates to English as "by a (continued) chat". "Per babili" makes sense, but it feels strange. God knows why, but its like saying "by chat" instead of "by chatting" to me. More experienced EOists can confirm or correct my opinion there.

I've found though that with prepositions, the things that must normally be nouns are:
agents (objects of per)
owners (objects of de)
destinations (objects of al)
origins (objects of el)
company (objects of kun)
reasons (objects of pro)* (ĉar is used for normal phrases with verbs/subordinate clauses)

However, "por" is special in that it can be used with "-i" verbs to indicate "in order to". E.g., mi devas iri por esti ĉe la naskiĝtaga festo de mia filino = I must go to be at my daughter's birthday party

Conjunctions like "ke" are a different kettle of fish. "Ke" means "that" in English in the sense of introducing a sentence that acts as an object or subject as a whole, as you probably know (aka noun clauses), so the bit after it should always be able to stand as if it were a normal sentence.

Genjix (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-18 22:03:20

ok, thanks

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-19 04:56:18

Prepositions go with nouns by definition. But in Esperanto, a very few prepositions are used with verbs. These are krom, por, and anstataŭ (except, for, instead of).

"Sen" is becoming common with verbs today, and I use it with verbs myself. I occasionally see people use "pri" with a verb but I don't like that usage and it's easy to avoid, since "pri" is often used to make a compound verb anyway (so if you felt like saying "Mi pensas pri iri", you could easily make that "Mi pripensas iri" and you'd be totally clear and not use a preposition before a verb)

ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-19 10:26:56

erinja:Prepositions go with nouns by definition. But in Esperanto, a very few prepositions are used with verbs. These are krom, por, and anstataŭ (except, for, instead of).
Is that because in cases where prepositions are used with verbs, they're technically being used as conjunctions, or the verbs are technically being used as nouns?

E.g. Mi malamus ŝin, krom mi amegas ŝin: krom's being used as a coordinating conjunction here isn't it? Or is this incorrect in Esperanto since I was translating from English.

Where as with "krom/por/anstataŭ _____-i", the verbs now being used as if it were a verbal noun which don't exist in Esperanto as they do in English (although they exist normally as -o or -ado), yeah?

Reen al la supro