"I could die for him."

Translation:Mi povus morti por li.

September 15, 2015

This discussion is locked.

[deactivated user]

    The other options I got were: "Mi ĝuas morti por li" and "Mi povus morti por laboras". I'm not sure which is worse.



    I remember learning these sentences a week or two ago. It's really annoying, because English doesn't distinguish tense/mood the same way that Esperanto does.

    The eternal-present (povas morti) has the neutral sense "could die sometime."

    The conditional (povus morti) has the unreal sense "could maybe die for him (under the right circumstances)." There is a strong subtext of "but fortunately it seems that I won't have to" - it expects a "se" or "sed."

    And when English would use "I can die for him" - as if I were volunteering - that would be the volitional (povu morti).

    (To round out the other two forms "mi povis morti" strongly implies "and I did," "povos morti" implies "and I will.")

    Just remember that the -as form is more neutral here, and that "could die" is more neutral in English. Deep breaths, this is a language-learning exercise, not a translation-craft exercise.


    Why is this incorrect? Mi mortigus por lin Why is povas needed


    "Mi mortigus" is "I would kill.

    "por lin" is incorrect. It needs to be "por li."

    Povas means "can". Povus means "could."


    Mi mortus por Riley!


    Ĉi tio memorigas min pri kanto de grupo kiu nomiĝas Rubo. ("#1 Crush")

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