Ku rupapuro rw'ibirimwo

Translating "[preposition] [verb]ing [noun]"

ca, kivuye

Ubutumwa 17

ururimi: English

paulbrill (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 7 Ndamukiza 2011 22:34:16

How would one translate something like "Thank you for washing the dishes", for example?

I know that lavi is "to wash", but what is the proper suffix in this context? "Lavas" wouldn't really make sense because it would be like saying "Thank you for is/are washing the dishes"--or am I wrong?

I'm thinking it should end up somewhere along the lines of "Dankon por lav___ la pladoj" but should it actually be totally restructured altogether?

Edit: Would I say "Dankon por lavado la pladoj"?

Evildela (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 7 Ndamukiza 2011 22:55:06

Dankon pro la lavado de la mangxilaroj/vazoj/pladoj.

That be how I'd do it

3rdblade (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 01:33:59

paulbrill:How would one translate something like "Thank you for washing the dishes", for example?

Edit: Would I say "Dankon por lavado la pladoj"?
I'd say "Dankon ke vi lavis la pladojn." (Thankyou, that you washed the dishes.) We don't use that form in English. The continuous form of the verb (-ing) seems to be a lot more used in English than EO, and it gets strange sometimes. (eg. What are you doing tomorrow?) I think in this case it's better to firmly describe it as happening in the past, which is what I think you meant. I.e, you just washed the dishes, so I thank you.

If you wanted to say thanks to someone who is in the middle of washing dishes, then I think your suggestion is OK, but you probably wouldn't need to say anything more than 'Dankon' because it would be clear what you're thanking them for!

danielcg (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 02:18:28

Here are some possible translations:

Dankon, ke vi lavis la pladojn.

Dankon pro tio, ke vi lavis la pladojn.

Dankon pro via lavo de la pladoj.

Always remember to translate the meaning of phrases and not individual words.

Regards,

Daniel

paulbrill:How would one translate something like "Thank you for washing the dishes", for example?

I know that lavi is "to wash", but what is the proper suffix in this context? "Lavas" wouldn't really make sense because it would be like saying "Thank you for is/are washing the dishes"--or am I wrong?

I'm thinking it should end up somewhere along the lines of "Dankon por lav___ la pladoj" but should it actually be totally restructured altogether?

Edit: Would I say "Dankon por lavado la pladoj"?

erinja (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 02:33:18

Most people would say "Dankon por via lavado de la pladoj", as Evildela says.

We use a preposition to indicate the direct object of a verb expressed in noun form.

But there is an interesting historical footnote. Zamenhof had a usage that never caught on; to modern speakers, it looks strange and wrong (one text that I read about it, an excerpt from an article in Monato that was indexed in the Tekstaro, even called this usage "a bit shocking").

Namely, he sometimes used the -n ending with verbs that were in noun form.

Today we would say "lavado de la pladoj". But Zamenhof might have said "lavado la pladojn". We would say "trinkantoj de vino", but he may have said "trinkantoj vinon"

Therefore in the sample sentence for this thread, Zamenhof might well have said "Dankon por via lavado la pladojn".

For anyone interested in reading a little further, the text in Monato discussing this topic comes from an article by Andre Cherpillod on the influence of Hebrew on Esperanto.

As I said, most Esperantists will consider Zamenhof's usage in this case to be strange and wrong. In my opinion, the only thing that makes it wrong is that it never caught on. But in languages, that seems to be as good a reason as any. At any rate I wouldn't recommend this usage, most people will think you're confused. For the purpose of clarity, it's better to stick with the noun-ized verb plus preposition (trinkado de vino, lavado de manĝiloj, kuirado de manĝo, etc)

PMEG also has a very brief discussion of this topic, with a similar notation that Zamenhof used -n after nouns of action, but that we don't do it today .

jchthys (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 02:41:30

That is interesting about Zamenhof's usage. To me it strikes a chord because, as mentioned in the PMEG section you linked to, in normal modern usage, de can mean either by the natural subject of the verb or to the natural object.

Are the alternatives (fare de, al) at all common?

esperantulo (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 03:15:56

I would also say, "Dankon, ke vi lavis la pladojn."

UUano (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 03:25:26

Is it wrong to say "Dankon por lavi la pladojn"?

darkweasel (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 05:07:39

UUano:Is it wrong to say "Dankon por lavi la pladojn"?
IMO, that's fine.

ceigered (Kwerekana umwidondoro) 8 Ndamukiza 2011 05:15:20

I normally use pro e.g. "dankon pro via lavado de la pladoj" (ala "dankon pro via helpo"), but only because I love nouns more than verbs ridulo.gif

Subira ku ntango