Sisu juurde
Vasta

Simplifying Tenses

kelle poolt sublimestyle, 19. veebruar 2011

Postitused: 91

Keel: English

sublimestyle (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 17:32.30

I was wondering if I could use the simple past tense for translating these sentences or would I have to use a compound tense. I know that many people who speak Esperanto like keep it simple, and try to stray away from using complex tenses.

Here are the English sentences:

1) The king thought that the boy had gone away with the older servants, and he was angry.

2) He had written a letter to her, with his pen, and had given her money.

So would these translations be a correct way in translating the English sentences above

1) La Reĝo opinis ke la knabo foriris kun la maljuna servisto, kaj li estas kolera.

2) Li skribis leteron al ŝi, per sia plumo, kaj donis al ŝi monon.

I am still a beginner and there might be other mistakes that I am not aware of in my translations.

Miland (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 18:21.41

You are right. Esperanto prefers to express things more simply, as befits an international language.

Your first sentence should be La Reĝo opiniis ke la knabo foriris kun la maljunaj servistoj, kaj li estis kolera.

Your second sentence looks all right to me.

will_gilbert (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 18:44.36

Looks like you are working your way through Ivy Kellerman's book! So am I. I found solutions to the first 17 chapters but beyond I'm sort of guessing but still learning.

http://esperanto-edmonton.wikidot.com/kellerman-an...

dombola (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 19:30.30

Saluton al ĉiuj, el Brazilo!
Miland:Your first sentence should be La Reĝo opiniis ke la knabo foriris kun la maljuna servisto, kaj li estis kolera.
You are right, but remark that
" La Reĝo opiniis ke la knabo foriris kun la maljuna servisto, kaj li estas kolera."
is not incorrect if it is used as a language resource to enliven the story, as seems to be the case.
See "La Tuta Esperanto" 83. Rimarko.

By the way,...maljunaj
servistoj

erinja (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 19:55.45

sublimestyle:I know that many people who speak Esperanto like keep it simple, and try to stray away from using complex tenses.
To clarify this, in brief - it is universally considered good Esperanto style to keep tenses simple. None of the major Esperanto writers made extensive use of compound tenses, and extensive use of compound tenses is only seen in beginners who haven't yet learned that it isn't considered good form.

So I wouldn't really call it a matter of opinion, because this isn't something that is debated in the Esperanto community. It's true that it's not considered grammatically wrong to make a lot of use of compound tenses. But just because something is not wrong doesn't mean that it's considered good style ridulo.gif

Miland (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 20:10.37

dombola:" La Reĝo opiniis ke la knabo foriris kun la maljuna servisto, kaj li estas kolera."
is not incorrect if it is used as a language resource to enliven the story, as seems to be the case..By the way,...maljunaj
servistoj
Dankon, good point. I've added the correction for plurals.

sublimestyle (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 20:41.18

Thank you for responses, especially for the information about there being an answer key for the first 17 chapters Ivy Kellerman's book. I was a bit frustrated with the book because I was never sure I had the right answer.

sudanglo (Näita profiili) 19. veebruar 2011 23:48.27

There is a significant difference between the two sentences when translating into Esperanto with simple -is forms of the verb.

In sentence 1. 'La Reĝo pensis ke la knabo foriris', the temporal relationship of the foriris and the pensis is that the foriris must (according to the conventions in Esperanto with reporting verbs) be a time in the past before the time of the pensado. So this sentence when translated back into English becomes 'The King thought the boy HAD gone away.

Sentence 2. however, could be translated back into English with 'He wrote her a letter and gave her some money'.

Now if it is important to make it clear, and it is not obvious from the context what the temporal values of the actions are, then it is legitimate to say 'Li estis skribinta leteron kaj estis doninta al ŝi monon

Whilst it is true that the complex forms of the verb with esti+particple are not so common in Esperanto, they are there to be used when needed for clarity.

In the literature adverbial forms with 'int' are very common.

sudanglo (Näita profiili) 20. veebruar 2011 0:02.58

Another way of conveying the pluperfect idea in Esperanto is to use 'jam'.

So, 'Li jam skribis leteron kaj jam donis monon'.

Sometimes you will see 'jam' combined with the complex form of the verb. So, 'Li estis jam skribinta leteron kaj doninta monon al ŝi.

sudanglo (Näita profiili) 20. veebruar 2011 10:58.46

On the question of style, it is not good style in Esperanto to be unclear.

So, if your sentence is seriously open to mis-interpretation with simple forms, then use the complex forms - always remembering that an adverb qualifier may be sufficient to disambiguate.

In any case, it is a bit sweeping to say that they are rarely used. The incidence varies with the particular complex form.

Mi estus X-inta is common in speech and writng.
Mi estis X-inta is probably more commonly seen than Mi estas X-inta.
Mi estis X-onta seems to me quite common - Mi esta X-anta rare.

In all there are 9 complex forms. (Edit: I was being a bit inattentive here, there are actually 15 active forms if you include the conditional and the infinitive, or 18 including the imperative)

For the English speaker the thing to avoid is the temptation to translate the present continuous and the present perfect with complex forms - ie I am X-ing and I have X-ed.

Tagasi üles