Translation:No, not in front of the toilet paper, but next to it.
Mirlington, are you translating from English to Hungarian? Then there is nothing wrong with using elé and mellé in the Hungarian, and also nothing wrong with using előtt and mellett instead.
Are you translating from Hungarian to English? Then it is clear that motion is intended. But it may be difficult to come up with a smooth English sentence that conveys that idea.
No, do not stand in front of the toilet paper, but next to it. (put it would probably work better ... somewhere in a storage room maybe)
Would smoothly add some sense and the desired motion into this rather hollow sentence.
I hope i can also offer a correct translation:
Nem, nem odaáll a wc-papír elé, hanem mellé.
I'd also prefer a verb here. I'm not so sure about "stand", because English is traditionally having problems with áll used for a motion. "Put it" would be nicer. :)
There are a two problems with your translation. First, you're not stating a fact but you're giving an order - "stand there!" That needs a different verb mode, the imperative. It's mostly formed by putting a -j at the end of the verb stem: Állj oda. - Stand over there. A negation of an imperative form is done with ne instead of nem: Azt ne érintsd meg. - Do not touch that.
Second, the word order is off. You have a sentence of the type "not this, but that". This construction wants to be in the focus, that's what's important here. You want to talk not about the action itself, but about the exact place. So the expression for the place has to be put in front of the verb stem.
So your sentence should be along the lines of: Nem, ne a wc-papír elé állj, hanem mellé.
Or with "don't put it there": Nem, ne a wc-papír elé tedd, hanem mellé.
Gosh, imperative conjugation is so cool. I'm sad it isn't taught in this course. :´)
I think two places are enough to indicate that at least a movement from a to b is the topic, despite stand. Or that someone is halfway on his way to (stand on) spot a and then is redirected to b.
No, not here, but there.
(No, not hither, but tither. I like those.:-) )
Nem, nem ide, hanem oda.
That is the core of the sentence?
If this is not an imperative type of sentence what is it then? How can two movements be a fact? (if they are not past tense? which would then conflict anyway?)
I think I read in another example that you can give orders without using the "real" order mode.
Something with odaáll gyerekek fenykepez and that a photographer can order in this way a kid to stand somewhere else...
What verb would then fit directly into this shallow sentence?
Maybe esik? For a paperplane?
No, don't fall down in front of the paper, but next to it. Next to it gives 50 points in our office championship.
I can't order a plane, so this would be a thought whilst it being midair?
Nem, nem a wc-papír elé esik, hanem mellé.
Just mentioning two places is not enough to make something a movement. For example: "Dad is not sitting in the living room, but in the kitchen." Using a verb of position is really not the best choice in these circumstances.
Yes, you can say that "nem ide, hanem oda" is the core here, the important part. "Not hither, but thither." "Nicht hierhin, sondern dorthin."
Two movements can easily be a fact (or rather, a description of what's happening, the indicative verbal mood). You can either put those in a sequence: "Walter is crossing the street and then going into the house." Or you can negate one, like the original sentence does, so just one of those movements is actually happening: "Walter is not crossing the street, but instead going into the house." It's all present tense and all indicative.
Ah, right. I forgot about that method. You can use the indicative as quasi-imperative, much like in German. So, yes, "Nem a wc-papír elé áll oda" is an okay translation. Though I would go for "állsz oda" in this case. It sounds a bit rude to give this kind of order to people you address with Ön. Sounds just like "Sie stellen sich nicht dort vor das Toilettenpapier" in German. Using the actual imperative still sounds better to me, especially if you translate it with the imperative in English (leaving out the "you" in the sentence).
"Nem a wc-papír elé esik" really only has the indicative meaning when talking about a paper plane: "It doesn't fall in front of the toilet paper." You can give orders to a paper plane. You just did with your English sentence.
If you want to go for the pseudo-imperative "You do not fall in front of the toilet paper" / "Du fällst nicht vor das Toilettenpapier", you need to conjugate the verb, so you directly address the plane: "Nem a wc-papír elé esel."
The real imperative would be "Don't fall in front of the toilet paper" / "Fall nicht vor das Toilettenpapier" / "Ne a wc-papír elé ess."
Well, because the sentence is intended to describe a motion. :D
English really hates implied motions and "to in front of the toilet paper" sound pretty clunky, I'd say. Starting from the English sentence, there's no way to know what's actually meant, so the counterpart with előtt and mellett should be accepted, too. Even though it doesn't create the confusion of sounding so much alike as easily as elé and mellé do.
I agree, "toilet tissue" could be added to the list of acceptable replies.
On the other hand, what's wromg with "toilet paper"? That is what the Hungarian actually says, and since the word in Hungarian, "papir", is obviously close to the English word "paper", why translate it as "tissue"?