前往目錄
回應

Non accusative verbs

貼文者: Genjix, 2010年9月22日

訊息: 30

語言: English

Genjix (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月22日下午10:54:23

I'm reading Reto Vortaro trying to guess which verbs are transitive and intransitive.

It says dolori is transitive.
tia operacio tre doloras
How comes? Surely that's intransitive (no object) there? And I see the examples there switching it's usage between tr and intr...

AnFu (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月22日下午11:22:09

Genjix:I'm reading another book.... The book is really old.
What book is it?

Alciona (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午12:13:56

Genjix:I'm reading Reto Vortaro trying to guess which verbs are transitive and intransitive.

It says dolori is transitive.
tia operacio tre doloras
How comes? Surely that's intransitive (no object) there? And I see the examples there switching it's usage between tr and intr...
The way 'dolori' (to hurt) is used in Esperanto is transitive. When you say 'Mia mano doloras' (my hand hurts) like we do in English, you are really saying 'Mia mano doloras min' (my hand hurts me). So your hand is the subject and you are the object, even if the object isn't mentioned explicitly.

According to David K. Jordan in 'Being Colloquial in Esperanto':
Sometimes the object (or even subject) is only implied.
Min doloras ĉi tie, Panjo. = I hurt here, Mommy. (subject omitted)
Tia operacio tre doloras. = Such an operation hurts a lot. (object omitted)
La vundo estis tre dolora. = The wound was very painful.

p. 135

erinja (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午2:06:29

It's like the verb "to eat", right?

Eat is clearly a transitive verb (I eat an apple) but you don't always have to specify an object (She is eating, When do we eat?, Let's eat!) These examples aren't intransitive usages, they're just situations where the object isn't specified.

Genjix (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午4:48:49

Thanks for clarifying that. One then will wonder why doligi exists.

AnFu:
Genjix:I'm reading another book.... The book is really old.
What book is it?
Jen Nia Mondo. It also has MP3's with it. Message me if you want it.

ceigered (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午5:15:01

I'm glad I read this thread - I always overanalysed "iĝi" and wasn't sure if it took an object or a perverba priskribo (such a good term). It's great to know that the things "esti" do occur for verbs of related use.

Miland (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午8:19:49

Genjix: One then will wonder why dolorigi exists.
Good question. Suppose we put in the implied object to begin with. "My stomach hurts (me)". Mia stomako doloras (min), Then add in a possible causative agent: "The blow caused my stomach to hurt (me)." La frapo igis mian stomakon dolori (min) = La frapo dolorigis mian stomakon. Clearer now?

oxymor (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午8:44:57

I don't understand why the verb simili accept objects, considering its meaning. Can you help me ?

"Mi similas vin" is correct, no ?
But I don't make an action on you in this case ...

thank you

Miland (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午10:26:50

oxymor:I don't understand why the verb simili accept objects, considering its meaning. Can you help me ? "Mi similas vin" is correct..?
Simili means "to resemble" or "be similar", to something else, which is the object. Mi similas min pli bone ol iu ajn alia might be a joke.

myris (顯示個人資料) 2010年9月23日上午10:51:39

oxymor:I don't understand why the verb simili accept objects, considering its meaning. Can you help me ?

"Mi similas vin" is correct, no ?
But I don't make an action on you in this case ...

thank you
This has nothing to do with action. This is grammar.

Some verbs have been created transitive (komenci), others intransitive (bruli). Why? Ask Zamenhof...

Transitivity can be changed using affixes ig and iĝ.

La papero brulas vs mi bruligas paperon.
Mi komencas laboron vs mia laboro komenciĝas.

Note that if ig is used with transitive verb, you get another meaning:

Mi faris mian laboron : I did my work
Mi farigis mian laboron: I had my work done (by somebody else)

回到上端