"She has to wear glasses, because her eyes are weak."

Translation:Ŝi devas porti okulvitrojn, ĉar ŝiaj okuloj estas malfortaj.

September 17, 2015

This discussion is locked.


It says I have a typo in my answer when I used siaj instead of ŝiaj for the second sentence bit, if that makes any sense. Could someone explain why you wouldn use siaj there?


Because "siaj" is refering to the nearest subject which in this case is "her eyes". But we are not talking about "her eyes' eyes" but about "her eyes".

"si" and its variants can never be part of the subject.


So if you wanted to say "She has to wear glasses, because she has weak eyes" you could say (in fact, would have to say) "Ŝi devas porti okulvitrojn, ĉar si havas okuloj malfortaj". Cxu ne?


because under no circumstance can "si/sia/siaj" ever become the subject or part of the subject. Please read the "si cannot be the subject part" of this webpage: https://lernu.net/en/gramatiko/pronomoj


I felt the explanation from Lernu was excellent for "si." However, when I came back to the example, I would interpret the sentence to be that she has to wear glasses because another woman's eyes are weak. The subject is neither the speaker nor the person being spoken to. Therefore, the second use of a pronoun must be a form of "si" so as to refer to the original subject... At least that's how I read it. My interpretation does not match the answer so I have a gap in my understanding. Any suggestions?


Each sub-clause has to be considered separately. See the "Subclause" subsection of the "Si" section at https://lernu.net/en/gramatiko/pronomoj#si


The predicate of a subclause has its own subject. If you use si(a) in a subclause it always represent the subject of the subclause, never the subject of the main clause[.]


Si can not itself be the subject. It is also not possible to use si as the subject of a subclause,or part of the subject of a subclause with the aim of making si represent the subject of the main clause.


I got my translation wrong, because I used "bezonas" instead of "devas". After looking up the difference between the two, this is my mnemonic for keeping them straight: "bezoNi" is followed by a Noun, and "deVi" is followed by a Verb. So, for example, "Mi bezonas la libron; mi devas legi la libron."


This isn't exactly the case. "Bezonas" doesn't have to be followed by a noun, for ex. Mi bezonas labori - I need to work. And other verbs can work too. Devas means "have to", "must" Bezonas Is closer to "need"


Mi sxatas tion. Dankon


Might I suggest a better way to remember it along those lines would be: bezoNi is "to Need" and deVi is " to haVe to".

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