ورود به محتوا
پاسخ دادن

Prepositions as building blocks

از EldanarLambetur, 17 اوت 2011

پست‌ها: 43

زبان: English

ceigered (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 13:55:59

orthohawk:I'm not saying use any phraseiology you want. It must convey your meaning. But we canNOT be bogged down with "that's not how we say it" which can very easily misconstrued as "that's wrong."
True and not true, I think it's good to keep both ideologies (creativity and following-the-crowd) prominent, and in conflict with each other. Chaotic, but we get good ideas from both. Currently I *think* things are relatively even....

darkweasel (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 13:57:04

orthohawk: "cxe" does NOT take a directional -n
sure?

orthohawk (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:05:46

darkweasel:
orthohawk: "cxe" does NOT take a directional -n
sure?
with nouns denoting place? yeah, I'm pretty sure. to indicate direction with place nouns you use "al."

ceigered (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:06:30

orthohawk:
ceigered:
erinja:Some beginners, like you, may feel that "if it doesn't contradict the rules, it's fair game". Some beginners might feel that, "Hey, why didn't you ever TELL me that no one ever says it this way? I thought you were the teacher!"
Or you end up with people like me... That should be scary enough.

Mi stas ĉe la domen', kiu stas ĉe la montsupr'/montsur', or Mi estas surmonte endoma (I'm in the house that's on top of the mountain okulumo.gif)
the first is nothing more than bad Esperanto. There is no root "st" and "cxe" does NOT take a directional -n since it is, by its very meaning, a static preposition not to mention the fact that adverbs are not used as objects of prepositions. I like that second one (except it really should be endome)
Actually, the first doesn't have a directional -en at all (I'll admit I was fishing for that reaction though a bit, hehe).

(The "sti" and lack of the o at the end of en are just me applying a poetic coating of Esperant'-paint.)

But anyway it's meant to be dom+en+o okulumo.gif

(of course, Domeno and Montsuro fall apart if the idea of turning prepositions into nouns is not even poetically acceptable, but since "ene" exists, I'm sure I can bend the rules since I'm going for poetic, or just plain crazy effect rather than being understood.

Thus the first is "I am at the location of the house-in (as a noun), which is at the location of the mountain-on (as a noun)", or "I am at the inside/in of the house, which is at the top/above of the mountain or alternatively, "I am at the house-yen coin, which is at the mountain-calf muscle".

(Mi volas havi montsurojn, sed mi supozas ke, por tio, mi devus piediri montsuren multe! rido.gif)

EDIT: after googling "giant calf muscles", I might be fine with just "montetsuroj" or maybe just "grassy-knoll suroj". I had no idea legs could look so... square...

darkweasel (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:12:09

orthohawk:
darkweasel:
orthohawk: "cxe" does NOT take a directional -n
sure?
with nouns denoting place? yeah, I'm pretty sure. to indicate direction with place nouns you use "al."
"mi iras cxe miajn geavojn" is correct however... though "al" is fine too.

Miland (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:18:18

darkweasel:"mi iras ĉe miajn geavojn" is correct..
I found three similar examples in the tekstaro:

(a) from Kastelo de prolongo:
Trifoje en la semajno, mi iris ĉe tiun viron.

(b) from Fabeloj de Andersen:
Adiaŭ, vi hela radio de la suno!” ŝi diris kaj etendis alten la malgrandajn brakojn kaj iris ĉe malgrandan distancon for de la domo de la kampa muso..

(c) From La Ŝtona Urbo:
“Mi aŭdis, ke vi iris ĉe Paŭlon,” li diris..

geo63 (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:24:18

Miland:
darkweasel:"mi iras ĉe miajn geavojn" is correct..
I found three similar examples in the tekstaro:

(a) from Kastelo de prolongo:
Trifoje en la semajno, mi iris ĉe tiun viron.

(b) from Fabeloj de Andersen:
Adiaŭ, vi hela radio de la suno!” ŝi diris kaj etendis alten la malgrandajn brakojn kaj iris ĉe malgrandan distancon for de la domo de la kampa muso..

(c) From La Ŝtona Urbo:
“Mi aŭdis, ke vi iris ĉe Paŭlon,” li diris..
In this case I understand those sentences as going to the place where they live, not to them directly as persons.

erinja (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:28:07

Right. You can't use -n after prepositions that naturally show movement in a direction (like al and el). But you can use -n after prepositions that show location, but not movement. The -n adds movement.

-n after "ĉe" would be one of those situations where something isn't very common but it is still correct.

ceigered (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:28:38

I take it "ĉe" is a lot more context-reliant than simply "at XYZ location in time and space exactly", judging by Geo's interpretation?

erinja (نمایش مشخصات) 19 اوت 2011،‏ 14:35:11

In English we use "at" only to mean "at a place". We would never say "at a person".

In Esperanto (and in many European languages) you can say "at a person", and the meaning is "at the person's house" or "at the person's place".

Incidentally, I have heard this use in English among Orthodox Jews, who have a few English turns of phrase that are influenced by Yiddish. It is common to hear phrases like "I spent shabbos [the Jewish Sabbath] by Miriam". It would mean that I spent the Sabbath at Miriam's house/apartment. The "by" is an anglicized version of the Yiddish word ביי, which is like the German "bei".

بازگشت به بالا