去目錄頁
回应

Simplifying Tenses

从 sublimestyle, 2011年2月19日

讯息： 91

语言: English

jchthys (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午2:24:18

My thinking is along these lines:

[LISTO]
Both ways of expressing a past perfect—either with an adverb or with a compound verb—are valid.
Often compound tenses get unwieldy or confusing.
Occasionally simple tenses aren't as clear, which provides an opportunity for compound tenses.
Excessive use of compound tenses looks like an English-speaking komencanto.[/list]In any case, can we bring the compromise forms into the discussion now? The infrequent use of falintis looks better to me than estis falinta—at least, more Esperanto-like.

Also, does anyone know how such concepts were usually worded a hundred years ago?

Chainy (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午8:50:36

Yes, ultimately I would prefer to stick to the simple method if possible, as Miland is suggesting. Just that sometimes, the other forms can be useful (the so-called 'complex' ones).

But, if we do use the simple forms, then it's essential to use the 'helper' words correctly. That is why I've been stressing the difference between using just 'jam' and 'jam antaŭe' in relation to the past continuous and past perfect. Miland doesn't seem to agree that there is a difference, which makes his translation very confusing for me.

As for 'falintis', well this is ok, but according to PMEG it's generally better to stick with 'estis falinta', and I think I agree with that. I certainly find it easier to understand the latter.

PMEG suggests that a word such as 'falintis' contains too much information crammed into the short word, which makes it difficult for people - there could be some truth in this. When I see 'falintis' I have to stop for a second to work it out! But, I suppose this is a matter of practice, and everyone could in theory get used to the shorter form (?).

The PMEG page on this is here

sudanglo (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午9:24:44

I mentioned earlier that I had come across examples in the literature which had left me puzzling over the meaning.

Here are two, taken from the first page of The translation of Maigret se trompe, Pub. 2009 (generally a good read).

I'll let you decide the meaning first, and then I'll say what the meaning should be.

1. Observante la homojn sur la stato, ŝi (madame Maigret) ekkonis la eksteran veteron.

2. Li (M. Maigret) siavice rigardis eksteren, kaj la kontraŭaj domoj estis preskaŭ forviŝitaj per la flava nubo, kiu subiris en la stratoj dum la nokto.

Chainy (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午9:49:27

sudanglo:

I'll let you decide the meaning first, and then I'll say what the meaning should be.
It's rather difficult translating these out of context, but here's my attempt:

Observante la homojn sur la stato, ŝi (madame Maigret) ekkonis la eksteran veteron = [While] observing the people on the street, she became aware of the weather outside.

- Not sure that I see what the possible misunderstanding could be with that sentence.

Li (M. Maigret) siavice rigardis eksteren, kaj la kontraŭaj domoj estis preskaŭ forviŝitaj per la flava nubo, kiu subiris en la stratoj dum la nokto. = He in turn looked outside and the houses opposite were almost wiped out by the yellow fog, which had fallen on the streets during the night.

- In the second sentence, you could interpret it as meaning 'which was descending on the streets during the night' (but then how could you possibly see fog or anything in the night? Unless there are good street lights I suppose) My guess would be that the action was taking place in the morning and the fog was still lingering. But, the context of the whole paragraph would make this clear.

- I'm sure there's a better way of putting it in English, rather than 'almost wiped out', but I just stuck with a very literal translation! ridulo.gif

Chainy (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午9:52:12

In fact, the 'flava nubo' could indicate it was indeed at night - yellow from the lights...?

Chainy (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午10:03:31

It's certainly tricky out of context, but you can say the same for the English:

He in turn looked outside and the houses opposite were almost wiped out by the yellow fog, which had fallen on the streets during the night.

Even the use of the past perfect (had fallen) does not indicate exactly what time of day the 'looking outside' took place. It could still be night, or it could be early morning (ie. sun rising). It's hard to say how long ago the fog fell - we just know that it's still there when the person looks out of the window.

And it doesn't really matter if you interpret 'subiris' as the past perfect or past continuous - it's irrelevant whether the fog is actually still 'coming down' or 'has already fallen' on the streets, the signifacant thing is that it's there!

sudanglo (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午10:40:37

Right Chainy, we are in agreement over the obvious meaning of the first sentence, and that's how I understood it.

The puzzlement arose because Madame Maigret had already been looking out of the window and had even just turned to M. Maigret and told him he had better wear his thick coat.

So she clearly had already seen what the weather was outside.

Yet using the simple past in this sentence (and particularly with 'ek') does nothing to sort out the sequence of events.

In the second sentence the clarity could noticeably be improved by using a compound form - 'estis subirinta'. Indeed, you youself showed how it could easily be understood that it was still night.

Delete the 'dum la nokto' from the sentence and you are left with the impression that the meaning is that that there is fog swirling in the street below which Madame Maigret is looking down on.

Using the compound form 'estis subirinta' leaves no doubt that the meaning of 'subiris' is had descended and that the fog had come down in the night.

You might say that this is all nit-picking and in a leĝera teksto such as a Maigret novel it doesn't matter.

But I'm reading for entertainment and I want the descriptions to transport me vividly into the action. I don't want to have to rack my brains to get the picture, or to stumble over an apparent contradiction.

Miland (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日上午11:26:31

sudanglo:Li (M. Maigret) siavice rigardis eksteren, kaj la kontraŭaj domoj estis preskaŭ forviŝitaj per la flava nubo, kiu subiris en la stratoj dum la nokto.
In my view, for reasons that I have explained earlier, the most likely leaning of subiris is that of a completed action, and so the translation should be as follows:

"He for his own part looked outside, and the house opposite had been almost erased by the yellow fog which had descended into the street during the night."

If the original French means something else, by all means let me know. rido.gif

sudanglo (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日下午12:40:24

But why have to guess the most likely meaning when you can make the meaning clear?

On the question of whether '-is' means completed action, in a subclause, relative to the (past) time of the main clause verb, you only have to rewrite the sentence to 'Maigret rigardis eksteren al la knaboj kiuj kuris en la strato' to see that won't wash.

If you want authority, look at section 271 (tempoj absolutaj) in PAG.

Though in this section PAG, having just shown that the complex verb forms serve a useful function then (rather perversely) goes on to belabour the point that they are not good style, rather than more helpfully illustrating when they are useful.

Clarity is good style, or rather, it is not good style to be unclear. And you can hardly say that the complex forms are not 'Fundamentaj'.

The idea that you should avoid the complex forms at all cost is not welcome.

sudanglo (显示个人资料) 2011年2月26日下午12:59:27

Jchthys, the forms 'povintus' and 'devintus' seem to me to be well established in the language and, for some reason I can't put my finger on, quite useful - perhaps in the case 'devintus', even to carry a slightly different meaning to 'estus devinta'.

And 'estintus instead of the clumsy 'estus estinta', would certainly seem to be a good idea, though I can't say that I have heard that much.

Rewriting 'estis falinta' as 'falintis', seems at the moment a step too far. Does one then lose the adjectival force of 'falinta' - presenting the whole idea as verbal.

Is that the reason?

回到上端