Al la enhavo
Respondi

-ig- VS -iĝ-

de Fou, 2011-aprilo-14

Mesaĝoj: 61

Lingvo: English

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 18:59:33

Tidalias:
Then would the case of:
Ĉu vi jam manĝiĝis la hundon?

contrastingly mean "Did you already make the dog become eaten?", or something else?
No.

As I said in my message -iĝ- words can't take a direct object. So "manĝiĝi" can't have an object. "Ĉu vi jam manĝiĝis?" means "Did you already get eaten?". So if you add on "la hundon", it really doesn't make sense, it would mean something like "Did you already get eaten the dog?"

The dog is sort of hanging out in the middle of nowhere, because "manĝiĝi" can't take an object.

Chainy:Can't say I've come across this one before. Sounds like a complicated way of saying 'foriri'. I'm having a hard time trying to work out why it should help by adding 'iĝi'?! In fact, does it even make any sense?
It isn't too common but you can do it. Check out the PMEG page on action roots with -iĝ-

If you add -iĝ- to an action verb that can't take an object, it's nearly equivalent to adding ek- to a verb. So sidiĝi ~= eksidi; iriĝi ~= ekiri. Aside from sidiĝi, this form isn't too common, but it isn't wrong. The form isn't seen very often so I wouldn't recommend that beginners go using it all the time, but at any rate it isn't wrong if you use it within the rules set out.

Roberto12:"We'll keep the red flag flying here"
There's no special ending for "continue to be". But the preposition "plu" has to do with continuation, and also the suffix -ad-.

For this sentence I expect you'd end up with a translation like "Ni flirtigados la ruĝan flagon ĉi tie" (We will cause the red flag to continually wave here), or "Ni plu flirtigos la ruĝan flagon ĉi tie" (We will continually cause the red flag to wave here)

Chainy (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 19:10:30

Roberto12:how do you express "to make continue to be" ? An example is this line from the song The Red Flag (which I daresay many an Esperantist has sung):

"We'll keep the red flag flying here"
In this sentence, 'keep' means that "we'll ensure, continue to make sure that the red flag remains flying".

I'd be tempted to simply say: Ĉe ni la ruĝa flago daŭre restos hisita.

Or to emphasize that is is us who will be actively involved in the process, you could say: "Ni zorgos, ke la ruĝa flago daŭre restos hisita."

Chainy (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 19:28:09

erinja:
It isn't too common but you can do it. Check out the PMEG page on action roots with -iĝ-

If you add -iĝ- to an action verb that can't take an object, it's nearly equivalent to adding ek- to a verb. So sidiĝi ~= eksidi; iriĝi ~= ekiri. Aside from sidiĝi, this form isn't too common, but it isn't wrong.
Fair enough. I certainly prefer 'ekiris', though! Generally, I think it's better to stick with the 'ek-' form as it's much clearer. The tricky thing about using -iĝ- in this sense is that it can have various effects on the verb depending on the situation.

erinja:The form isn't seen very often so I wouldn't recommend that beginners go using it all the time
Absolutely. Probably best to omit words such as 'foririĝis' when explaining '-iĝ-' to beginners!! It's completely unnecessary for this to be in any such explanation as it is so rarely used and there's a much better alternative!

Tidalias (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 19:28:22

Ah, I remember telling myself that I was making a mistake by even giving the -iĝ form an object, but it slipped my mind. You cleared the issue right up, thanks!

Incidentally, "Did you already get eaten?" is at least a pleasingly silly result for the trimmed sentence.

Chainy (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 19:31:02

tommjames: Though I'd much prefer ekforiri myself. Use of -iĝ seems to me to make much more sense on intransitives that imply state, like sidi, boli etc.
I agree with you on both points.

Chainy (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 19:45:19

erinja:
It isn't too common but you can do it. Check out the PMEG page on action roots with -iĝ-
There's definitely no example of 'foririĝis' or 'iriĝis' on that page. In fact, I can't seem to find any examples of such words actually being used, anywhere! Certainly not with 'iri'. (Can anyone find any examples?!)

All the examples on the PMEG page are the more traditionally accepted ones.

"Ek-" can definitely be used with anything. It seems a bit iffy when it comes to -iĝ- in this sense.

Roberto12 (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 21:21:32

(Thanks erinja & Chainy)

Fou (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 22:55:55

Hey, thanks guys ridego.gif Btw, English isn't my first language. It's Tagalog and our concept of transivity is agglunitive based XD

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-14 23:04:43

Chainy:In fact, I can't seem to find any examples of such words actually being used, anywhere! Certainly not with 'iri'. (Can anyone find any examples?!)
Eliriĝis is in the tekstaro, from Robinson Crusoe.

"Kiu ajn en osto ennaskiĝis, ne el karno eliriĝis."

danielcg (Montri la profilon) 2011-aprilo-15 00:12:19

No. Verbs with -iĝ- can't have a direct object.

"Did you already make the dog become eaten?" could be translated as: "Ĉu vi jam manĝitigis la hundon?" or "Ĉu vi jam igis la hundon esti manĝita?" or "Ĉu vi jam igis oni manĝi la hundon?", but it certainly seems weird.

Regards,

Daniel

Tidalias:
Then would the case of:
Ĉu vi jam manĝiĝis la hundon?

contrastingly mean "Did you already make the dog become eaten?", or something else?

Reen al la supro