Tästä sisältöön
Vastaa

Adverbs

EldanarLambetur :lta, 28. toukokuuta 2011

Viestejä: 6

Kieli: English

EldanarLambetur (Näytä profiilli) 28. toukokuuta 2011 18.47.59

I recently saw this structure on this forum:

Mi renkontis Marian irante al la stacio.

For: "I met Mary walking (going?) to the station."

And an alternative:

Mi renkontis Marian irantan al la stacio.

Meaning instead that I met mary while she was walking to the station, rather than myself.

I was curious about this use of adverb (irante). Anyone feel like explaining it? I wondered, why couldn't "ire" be used? What's the difference? Are there any other such uses?

I noticed I found it most difficult to understand the use of adverbs that are produced from verb-like roots, e.g. "go" is verb-like, but it's easy to see the usage of an adverb made from an adjectival root like "quick".

Thanks!

darkweasel (Näytä profiilli) 28. toukokuuta 2011 18.56.44

According to the two hits I found in Tekstaro for \\bire\\b, the adverb ire seems to show a manner of doing something, not the action of going itself.

Concerning the irante structure in general, see Participoj kiel E-vortoj.

Also note that, while Esperanto grammar allows you to add any ending to any root, not all combinations of root+ending make any sense.

geo63 (Näytä profiilli) 28. toukokuuta 2011 19.05.35

These are participles, I don't know exact English term:

adjectivial present participle - iranta
adverbial present participle - irante

First one is just an adjective and can describe the object we are talking about:

Maria skribanta leteron - mi vidas Marian skribantan leteron.

Johano kuranta en la korto - Mi rigardas Johanon kurantan en la korto.

infano ploranta en la lito - Mi aŭdas infanon plorantan en la lito.

The second describes the action of the subject:

Sidante en mia ĉambro mi legis libron
Dormante en mia lito mi nenion aŭdis
Parolante kun ŝi li ne rimarkis sian amikon.

hermeso (Näytä profiilli) 28. toukokuuta 2011 19.06.45

"Mi renkontis Marian irante al la stacio.

For: "I met Mary walking (going?) to the station."

And an alternative:

Mi renkontis Marian irantan al la stacio.

Meaning instead that I met mary while she was walking to the station, rather than myself."

The first sentence means: I, who goes to the station , I met Mary to the station

The second sentence means: I met Mary to the station, Mary is going to the station

The adverb is all wich the subject, but no the object

EldanarLambetur (Näytä profiilli) 28. toukokuuta 2011 19.56.26

I think I get it, and that link was very helpful! Thanks!

sudanglo (Näytä profiilli) 29. toukokuuta 2011 10.37.40

There is a further subtlety in this area as to whether the participle should agree in case with the object.

With verbs of perception like vidi and aŭdi, it is common to use the nominative.

So - Atentu! Ĉu vi ne povas aŭdi virinon ploranta (ke virino ploras)

But, also Mi rimarkis kelkajn virinojn plorantajn en la strato pro lia morto (I saw some women in the street and they were crying - I saw some crying women (plorantajn virinojn).

However this is a subtle distinction compared to the one made with adverbial use of the participle. That's the usage you need to get right as it can make a substantial difference in meaning (who is doing the action).

I think the situation may be less clear cut when a plain adverb is used.

Survoje al la stacidomo mi renkontis Johanon, I would interpret as that I was going to the station.

But Telefonu min hejme ĉi-vespere, I would take to mean when I am at home, not when the person I am talking to is at home.

I can't think of an example off the top of my head, but there may be cases where an adverbial participle can be used circumstantially like the Telephone example.

Takaisin ylös