Yes, but in modern English 'awaits' is usually followed by an abstract object rather than a person: "I'm awaiting your decision" but "I'm waiting for you".
Seems strange that fiu is in the accusative, since fiu is not the direct object in the sentence. Could anybody explain this?
In Hungarian fiút is the direct object of this sentence. The word vár, does not take dative, but takes a direct object.
Exactly. Like in the below examples
Várlak téged - I wait for you
Várom őt - I wait for him
Várlak titeket - I wait for you all
Várom őket - I wait for them
I love how the subject is "I" in all 4 examples, yet the verb endings are different.
Oh, and I almost forgot that you can make it even shorter.
- Várlak téged is equivalent with Várlak
So if you just say Várlak that means I am waiting for you.
I don't think we can say it that decisively. Only for individual situations. So, in this sentence, yes, it is transitive.
Just like in English:
I am waiting - intransitive
I wait until tomorrow - intransitive
I wait for you - intransitive
I am waiting the results of the test - transitive
I am waiting for a chance to strike - intransitive
I wait tables at a restaurant - transitive
It is pretty much the same with Hungarian. It depends on the situation.
The above sentence could also be:
"Az ügyvéd egy fiúra vár." - "The lawyer is waiting on a boy."
And, "Az ügyvéd egy fiút vár" could also mean "The lawyer is expecting a boy". And there you go, both the Hungarian and the English used the accusative.
So, it is complicated. :)
fekundulo, why do you write "since fiu is not the direct object in the sentence"? But it IS the direct object of the Hungarian sentence. Are you perhaps thinking of the English sentence?