"Admit that you are sorry for what you did!"

Translation:Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras kion vi faris!

September 10, 2015

This discussion is locked.


Bedaŭras = are sorry for ?


Jes, ankaŭ to regret.


Ĉi tiu estss la respondo mi serĉis


Bone, sed devas esti „…, kiun mi serĉis.“

In English subordinate clauses it is often posstible or even normal to omit the word „that“. In Esperanto this is not possible.

  • …the answer (that) I was looking for = la respondo, kiun mi serĉis.
  • I heard (that) you are French = Mi aŭdis, ke vi estas franco.


I am a little surprised that "ke" is not necessary here, somehow. "Kion vi faris" (what you did) seems to me to be separate from "vi bedaŭras ..."


Why can I not say pri instead of pro? Surely 'sorry about what you did" makes sense.


Is "Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras pri kio vi farris" correct?


There are three aspects here:

  • “Bedaŭras” is a transitive verb, so it should normally be used with the accusative. But in this case “pri” is similar in meaning, so I personally would accept it.
  • The full relative construct would be “tio, kion vi faris.” “Kion” is the direct object of “faris” and must use the accusative. The demonstrative part (here: tio) can be omitted only if the two are in the same case (both nominative or both accusative). Here “tio” is in the nominative, so it cannot be omitted.
  • The verb must be “faris,” not “farris.”


From your second bullet point, I learnt

The demonstrative part (here: tio) can be omitted only if the two are in the same case (both nominative or both accusative).

So I assume that if I use bedaŭras as a transitive verb, I can say either, "Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras tion, kion vi faris" (using the full relative construct) or "Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras kion vi faris" (as in the recommended answer). Is that correct?


That's correct. (Except that I would put a comma before kion in the recommended answer.)


Why pro instead of por?


if you're looking for meaningful feedback in the forum: It's always good to include:

  • the whole sentence you entered
  • the full correction
  • any unused word tiles
  • screenshot or copy-paste is best

Clear questions with full sentences are appreciated. Questions of the form "ABC is wrong because?" will often get answered, but not by me. Questions of the form "hundo?" are probably clear to the asker, but not always to the answerer.


pri kio why -n after a preposition? There is no movement involved


There is no “pri” in the proposed solution (Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras kion vi faris). Could you please give us the complete sentence you are asking about?


As Renardo_11 has already said,

There is no “pri” in the proposed solution (Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras kion vi faris).

However, there are accepted answers to this exercise that use the preposition pro. Among them are the following:

  • Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras pro tio, kion vi faris!
  • Konfesu, ke vi bedaŭras pro kion vi faris!

As very much a learner myself, I'm in no position to say anything authoritatively, but from what I can make out, the first of the above is the fully grammatical form, using "pro tio, kion …", but in such cases it is apparently accepted in practice that tio may be omitted, producing the second.

It might be worth looking at esperanto.stackexchange.com/questions/129/use-of-the-word-kio-as-the-object-of-a-non-question-sentence, which I found by doing a Google search for 'esperanto "tio kion"', and at some of the links in the answers there for further information about this.

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