Mesaĝoj: 30
Lingvo: English
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 12:01:13
Ĉu la ŝuoj doloras, aŭ ĉu ili dolorigas?
I wouldn't fuss to much about the dictionary classification as to 'tr' aŭ 'intr' in every case. The trick is to know how to use the words - for which the examples will usually suffice.
There is a tendency for the grammarians to try and strait-jacket the language to fit their categories.
If you fret too much you might give yourself a 'kapdoloron'.
By the way, I see that REVO has a comment "Oni ofte uzas la simplan vorton dolori anstataŭ dolorigi"
The issue of intransitivity is not always clear cut.
By one of the rules of the famous 16 rules you can use an accusative instead of a preposition and so sometimes you can see the accusative after a classically intransitive verb.
'Ni iris longan vojon' kaj 'Ni alvenis Londonon' illustrate this.
And to take up Erinja's example of manĝi - when I say 'Kion ili faras' and get the answer 'Ili manĝas' you could well consider this intransitive use. But you need to know the difference between 'La kato manĝas' and 'Mi manĝigis la katon'.
If you stick with the idea that if your foot hurts, say 'Mia piedo doloras', and that the dentist might say 'Ne timu, mi ne dolorigos vin', then this should orientate you.
I leave it to others to explain the subtle difference between 'doloraj pensoj' and dolorigaj pensoj'.
oxymor (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 12:08:11
"Mi similas vin" has the same meaning has "Vi similas min". Not the same translation, I agree, but the meaning is the same...
So I don't understand why Zamenof decided that simili needs -n. Here the -n precises nothing...
It's the only verb that I know, for which -n is required but useless.
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 12:12:52
oxymor:So I don't understand why Zamenof decided that simili needs -n. Here the -n precises nothing..."Simili" doesn't require the accusative ending, it's quite alright to say "vi similas al mi", or "vi estas simila al mi". A transitive verb in Esperanto is defined as capable of accepting a direct object, not that it has to have one.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 12:19:05
You might argue that simili followed by the accusative is a case of the accusative replacing a preposition, or you might say that simili is transitive.
The dictionary, by marking simili as 'tr' shows that you can use an accusative.
erinja (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 14:41:28
If I say that my friend looks like Tom Cruise, would I reverse that and say that Tom Cruise looks like my friend? Probably not.
If I say that my friend behaves similarly to a king (perhaps my friend orders people around and expects them to serve him), should I say instead that a king behaves similarly to my friend? Probably not. The idea of one thing being similar to another isn't really as reversible as you think.
AnFu (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 16:30:06
Alciona:Genjix:...It says dolori is transitive.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.tia operacio tre dolorasHow comes? Surely that's intransitive (no object) there? ...
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:It's like the verb "to eat", right?She is eating (food).
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.
When do we eat (food)?
Let's eat (food)!
(The unstated 'food' is the object.)
Miland:...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?Clearer now? Yes, it is. Thanks.
AnFu (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-23 18:11:00
Genjix:Thank you. I think I've downloaded those already, but I'm not ready for it yet: I'm studying mostly grammar now.AnFu:Jen Nia Mondo. It also has MP3's with it. Message me if you want it.Genjix:I'm reading another book.... The book is really old.What book is it?
Genjix (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-24 13:00:22
sudanglo:Consider new shoes, Genjix, which aren't always comfortable until broken in.Mi ne scias (la respondon
Ĉu la ŝuoj doloras, aŭ ĉu ili dolorigas?
).La ŝuoj dolaras
The shoes hurt ([to] me)
Ili dolorigas
They are causing pain
Mi doloriĝas
I am becoming in pain (I will be in a state of pain)
Correct?
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-24 14:08:31
@ Genjix:
It's dolOR, when you write dolAR you confuse me
.But I believe it goes:
"Miaj piedoj doloras" (My feet have pain)
"La ŝuoj dolorigas" (The shoes cause to have pain)
"Mi doloriĝas" (I'm becoming pained/anguished (painful is doloriga), I am currently in a transitional state from being god knows what to being pained)
I say this after skipping over most of the conversation and checking ReVo a few times, thus I've accidentally disregarded what Sudanglo was saying, so if I've missed anything my apologies.
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2010-septembro-24 14:13:35
Genjix:La ŝuoj dolarasShoes for a dollar (dolaro)? No wonder they hurt. Can't get something for nothing.
The shoes hurt ([to] me)
What you wrote looks all right, except that we don't usually say Mi doloriĝas but something doloras min.