إلى المحتويات
رد

Are these translations correct?

من Zeiterius, 31 يوليو، 2011

المشاركات: 19

لغة: English

Zeiterius (عرض الملف الشخصي) 31 يوليو، 2011 11:23:26 ص

Hey guys. I just started learning Esperanto through an email course and this site. So i had to do some translations. I just want to know if they are correct, because i'm in doubt if i should put -n on the objectives (If they are objectives):

Sixty minutes are one hour. = Sesdek minutoj estas unu(n?) horo(n?).
Twenty-four hours are one day (and night). = Dudek kvar horoj estas unu(n?) tago(n?).

If there are other mistakes then please tell me ridego.gif Thank you for your time.

geo63 (عرض الملف الشخصي) 31 يوليو، 2011 11:52:57 ص

Sixty minutes are one hour. = Sesdek minutoj estas unu horo.
Twenty-four hours are one day (and night). = Dudek kvar horoj estas unu tagnokto.

sudanglo (عرض الملف الشخصي) 31 يوليو، 2011 11:53:54 ص

I don't think I have ever seen a case of a direct object accusative after 'esti', also numbers don't normally take the accusative ending - unless they also take an 'o' eg miliono, dudeko (a million, a score)

However after 'egali' you may use the accusative. 60 minutoj egalas unu horon.

Zeiterius (عرض الملف الشخصي) 31 يوليو، 2011 11:58:17 ص

Okay thank you very much guys! rideto.gif

darkweasel (عرض الملف الشخصي) 31 يوليو، 2011 12:24:16 م

geo63:
Twenty-four hours are one day (and night). = Dudek kvar horoj estas unu tagnokto.
imo esperanto "tago" is just as ambiguous (24 hours vs. only the time when it's not dark) as English-language "day".

RiotNrrd (عرض الملف الشخصي) 2 أغسطس، 2011 5:29:34 م

sudanglo:However after 'egali' you may use the accusative. 60 minutoj egalas unu horon.
I'm not saying that is incorrect, but... What is the direct object in that sentence? The 60 minutes isn't doing anything TO the hour, it IS the hour. The use of the accusative here doesn't seem right to me, as both "sides" of the sentence relate to the subject.

Miland (عرض الملف الشخصي) 2 أغسطس، 2011 6:31:31 م

RiotNrrd:
sudanglo:60 minutoj egalas unu horon.
What is the direct object in that sentence?
I would say that the direct object is horo. The "action" is not physical, but is similar to "reaching" a certain level in a field, where the metaphor of climbing is not taken literally; li atingis altan nivelon en la kampo, "he reached a high level in the field" - but he didn't literally "do" anything to that high level.

tommjames (عرض الملف الشخصي) 2 أغسطس، 2011 7:31:48 م

Indeed "doing something to" is just a concept from the semantic world which can often (but not always) be used to explain the relationship between a verb and it's direct object. Clearly this is a case where that explanation doesn't work.

I would personally be more inclined just to say -n replaces "al" and have done with it, rather than worry about direct objects and such.

BTW this also works the same way with simili.

RiotNrrd (عرض الملف الشخصي) 2 أغسطس، 2011 9:21:00 م

tommjames:I would personally be more inclined just to say -n replaces "al" and have done with it, rather than worry about direct objects and such.
Ah, so you are saying it isn't the accusative at all, but rather the replacement of AL with -N. That is a completely different state of affairs.

tommjames (عرض الملف الشخصي) 2 أغسطس، 2011 9:38:47 م

RiotNrrd:Ah, so you are saying it isn't the accusative at all, but rather the replacement of AL with -N.
Well when you drop a preposition you replace with the accusative (shown by -n), so I'd have to say no to the first bit and yes to the second.

عودة للاعلى