I would post this under the questions section, but it's difficult to ask questions and receive answers about how to form Esperanto sentences in Esperanto.

Are these sentences written correctly? My book on Esperanto does not cover some of the grammar used in these sentences (mainly subordinate clauses).

EO: La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas esti ĵetinta la pilkon al la knabino.

EN: The boy, who has a ball, wants to have thrown* the ball at the girl.

EO: Mi ŝatas, kie vi kuras tage.

EN: I like where you run during the day.

*To clarify, the wording was intentional, as to learn how to form sentences with complex tenses.

Foist thin's foist

"esti ĵetinta" is technically correct, but "-nt-" forms are probably something better avoided in this particular sentence. From what I've read, this is the meaning of the first sentence:

"The boy, who has a ball, wants to be having thrown the ball to the girl".
This seems a bit strange.

"La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volis ĵeti la pilkon al la knabino"
(The boy, who has a ball, wanted to throw the ball to the girl)
or
"La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas ĵeti la pilkon al la knabino"
(The boy, who has a ball, wants to throw the ball to the girl)
or
"La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas ke li ĵetis la pilkon al la knabino"
(The boy, who has a ball, wanted that he had thrown the ball to the girl) (possibly regretting not doing so)

----

"Mi ŝatas kie vi ekkuras tage" to me translates as "I like where you start running daily/in the day (daily/everyday can be translated as "ĉiutage", but "tage" also has an "everyday" feel to it, if the rest of the sentence is written as if it's "everydayish", like this one).

I like where you run during the day = "Mi ŝatas (la lokon) kie vi kuras (dum la tago/tage = choose whatever you like).

----

I wouldn't worry about posting a question of this nature here. It's confusing being told in another language how grammar works unless you understand the language at a level where you no longer need an explanation haha

swfarnsworth:
EN: The boy, who has a ball, wants to have thrown the ball at the girl.

?!? I'm trying to follow you here. Do you mean that he wants to throw the ball at the girl?

swfarnsworth:I would post this under the questions section, but it's difficult to ask questions and receive answers about how to form Esperanto sentences in Esperanto.

Are these sentences written correctly? My book on Esperanto does not cover some of the grammar used in these sentences (mainly subordinate clauses).

EO: La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas esti ĵetinta la pilkon al la knabino.

EN: The boy, who has a ball, wants to have thrown the ball at the girl.

EO: Mi ŝatas, kie vi ekkuras tage.

EN: I like where you run during the day.

I always think that the sentence word that indicates the time is not the verb but yes the adverb. Por exemple:

Bone: Mi estas legante la libron.

Sed plibone: Nun mi legas la libron.

Thus the Esperanto sentences are easier.

What is your opinion?

Francisko

swfarnsworth:I would post this under the questions section, but it's difficult to ask questions and receive answers about how to form Esperanto sentences in Esperanto.

Are these sentences written correctly? My book on Esperanto does not cover some of the grammar used in these sentences (mainly subordinate clauses).

EO: La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas esti ĵetinta la pilkon al la knabino.

EN: The boy, who has a ball, wants to have thrown the ball at the girl.

EO: Mi ŝatas, kie vi ekkuras tage.

EN: I like where you run during the day.

Adverb better than verb:

Kiam mi estis mangxante li venis, better is: Samtempe kiam mi mangxis li venis

Francisko

Mi estas leganta and mi estis manĝanta.

swfarnsworth:EO: La knabo, kiu havas pilkon, volas esti ĵetinta la pilkon al la knabino.

EN: The boy, who has a ball, wants to have thrown the ball at the girl.

These look equivalent to me. As long as they say what they're meant to (which is something a bit strange) they're fine IMO.

EO: Mi ŝatas, kie vi ekkuras tage.

EN: I like where you run during the day.

I'm not so sure about this one. The "ek" looks wrong, and it's not totally clear to me what's being liked, so I'd translated the EN version into:

Mi ŝatas la lokon/lokojn kie vi kuras tage

"kiam mi manĝas li venis" is fine without any more adverbs, as the "kiam" tells us it was during the action.

Francisko1:I always think that the sentence word that indicates the time is not the verb but yes the adverb. Por exemple:

Bone: Mi estas legante la libron.

Sed plibone: Nun mi legas la libron.

Thus the Esperanto sentences are easier.

Concuerdo

To me, using esti + -int-/-ant-/-ont- is sort of "stative", telling you what state your in.

E.g. "kiel estas li?" "Li estas mortanta" (vs. "Li mortas" which sounds like he's going to die any second now).

Or "Mortante, lia amiko demandis al lia patrino, "Kiel estas li".

Where as for a more active role, the true verb form is less jarring (laŭ mi )

roberto12: it's not totally clear to me what's being liked, so I'd translated the EN version into:

Mi ŝatas la lokon/lokojn kie vi kuras tage

I think in this case it's possible to get away without further clarifying. The other interpretable meaning could be "Where you run daily, I like (omitted object)", but I think most will think of "kie" as the object of that sentence, thus making "la loko(j)n" an option rather than a necessity.

"ceigered":It's confusing being told in another language how grammar works unless you understand the language at a level where you no longer need an explanation haha

Well put .

"Roberto12":The "ek" looks wrong

Yes, that was a mistake. I should remove it in the original post.

"Chainy":?!? I'm trying to follow you here. Do you mean that he wants to throw the ball at the girl?

It's just an example sentence, so I wasn't concerned with whether or not it made logical sense.

"ceigered":"esti ĵetinta" is technically correct, but "-nt-" forms are probably something better avoided in this particular sentence.

I admit that I don't fully grasp participles. The English explanation on this website does not go in depth, and I can't understand the Esperanto explanation for the reason ceigered mentioned in the first quote .

Complex verbs are seldom used in Esperanto, which is why the lernu site doesn't spend a lot of time explaining how they work.

We do use participles in their 'native' form, that is, as a verb in the form of an adjective (the running dog - la kuranta hundo). But we very seldom use them to form complex verbs ("he will have gone" - li estos irinta)

In Esperanto style, we value simple and concise forms. Therefore in most cases we use only a simple verb tense (-is, -as, etc) rather than a complex verb (a form of "to be" plus a participle form).

We normally only use the complex verbs in situations when the exact timing of an action is important, but and the simple verb plus context don't provide enough information to tell you the timing.