1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Ni helpis nin reciproke."

"Ni helpis nin reciproke."

Translation:We helped each other.

September 7, 2015



Why is nin needed ?


Surely you must know who you helped mutually/reciprocally?


No - if it's mutually, it must obviously be "ourselves" if the subject is "we". Note that the English sentence is fine without an explicit "ourselves" - the "each other" in combination with the subject "we" unambiguously identifies the object as well.

Esperanto needs the "nin", yes, but you can't say that it does so because of some logical necessity.


It is not because a speaker of languages where the object wouldn't be needed doesn't understand the sentence. It is needed because "helpi" is a transitive verb and requires an object.

English also is totally fine with saying "The door closed".

Native speakers of eg. Esperanto or any Scandinavian language would sit there waiting for the rest of the sentence: The door closed... what? The door closed the locker, the car, the book?

So to speakers of other languages "nin" might be a logical necessity here.


I totally agree, for what it is worth. Very well spoken. A +1 just wasn't enough this time (to whom it may concerns). just mina deux cents...


I don't know that that is true. How about "We helped them reciprocally"? Of course, with "each other" it is implicit, but Esperanto doesn't have "each other"; what it has is more closely equivalent to "reciprocally". Even in English, when you use that, you still need the object.


Ne, "Ni helpis ilin reciproke"

We can reciprocate help between more than just ourselves.


Why does reciproke have to come after nin?


"Ni helpis reciproke nin" is also ok.


If you were to just say "Ni helpis nin" it could be translated as "We helped ourselves" which could just mean that everyone just helped their own selves. Adding "reciproke" makes it unambiguous: "We helped each other."


Ni * helpis * nin *.

All those * are acceptable places put reciproke. I think you can even put it at the beggining, before 'ni' in this sentence.


I think it can also be pushed before "Ni". Cxu ne?


Shouldn't it be sin?


No, "sin" is only used in that sense in the third person, not first and second person. So not for "mi", "vi", and "ni". See the tips & notes for the skill "Family".


Why is "We helped ourselves" not a correct translation? While English is not my first language, it feels equivalent to "We helped each other"


ourselves is reflexive while each other is reciprocal.

If you have Peter, Paul, and Mary, and they all help themselves, then Peter helps Peter, Paul helps Paul, and Mary helps Mary.

But if Peter, Paul, and Mary all help each other, then Peter helps Paul, Paul helps Mary, and Mary helps Peter (for example).


Why would "We helped ourselves reciprocally" be incorrect?


Sounds like a struggle of the infancy of this course. You can report it.


Reciproke vs. mem? Bonvolu klarigi, mi tute ne komprenas mem-n


Why not ni helpos sin reciproke?


Why not ni helpos sin reciproke?

sin refers back to a third-person subject.

ni is first person, not third.

Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.