"The old, faulty televisions are in the attic too."
Translation:A régi, rossz televíziók is a padláson vannak.
27 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Some locations prefer different suffixes than others. Sometimes there's logic behind it, sometimes there isn't.
It's worth memorising the three groups of the location-related suffixes:
- illative, inessive, elative: -ba, -be / -ban, -ben / -ból, -ből
- sublative, superessive, delative: -ra, -re / -on, -en, -ön / -ról, -ről
- allative, adessive, ablative: -hoz, -hez, -höz / -nál, -nél / -tól, -től
The first forms in each group express motion towards a location, the second ones express being at a location (no movement), the third ones express motion away from a location.
If you know that a word always takes a certain suffix out of these, you'll know which suffix to use when expressing the other directions. So if you go to the attic / come from there, it will be "padlásra" and "padlásról".
Thanks for that explanation. I like the way you grouped the suffixes and I find it most helpful, although I can't say I still completely understand. Are you saying that "padlás" is only going to take suffixes from the second group which is why it is "-on" instead of "-ban"? Because certainly the televisions are sitting inside the space referred to as an attic, but they would use "-on" here to express that idea?
Exactly! It seems that in Hungarian padlás is somehow perceived as a flat surface you put things on.
That is because it is basically the ceiling of the space below - not a room in its own right.
It's either feast or famine when it comes to information like this. Unfortunately, you've summed up three modules in this single post. The only way to save it is either bookmark the page or copy the text into a local file. It should have been split among the three modules.
....and I still don't know where to put the word "IS"!
I have a document dedicated to DL sentence tips.
"The old, faulty televisions are in the attic too."
Is it televisions and something else in the attic? Then "is" follows the televisions - "televíziók is"
Or are the televisions in the attic and somewhere else (far less likely) then "is" follows attics.
That would mean "The old, faulty televisions are [not only in the cellar but] in the attic, too." Which sounds a bit odd to me, because a television can't be in two places at once. It would be a bit more natural without the definite article: Vannak régi, rossz televíziók a padláson is "There are old, faulty televisions [not only in the cellar but] in the attic, too."
Duo's Hungarian sentence, on the other hand, is "[Not only the new, clean books are in the attic, but] the old, faulty televisions are in the attic, too." -- the is after the televisions indicating that they are the "also" thing.
Yes, for one television, but here we are talking about several. I can see situations where there are (some) old faulty televisions in the attic and some in the basement. Thank you for the comment as it clearly explains the impact of placing "is" at a given place.
Of course, there can be situations where there are some in the attic and some in the basement. But when I speak of "the faulty televisions" (with definite article), I think I would speak of all of them as a group -- and then this entire group cannot be in two places at once.
It would would better without the definite article.
-------- regi is old things; oreg is old people (i don't know about animals/pets ) . . .
A television can also be "öreg", but usually it is "régi". The difference between "öreg" and "régi" is this:
"öreg" is aged,
"régi" is from old times, or something that has been for a long time.
A good example is friends:
"öreg barátom" - my friend who is old
"régi barátom" - someone I have been friends with for a long time, but not necessarily an old person.
We tend not to use "öreg" for objects as much as "régi", but it is possible.
That is just incorrect. When it is about where something is, the normal word order is "a padláson van".
When we have a different verb, both ways are possible:
"Olvasok a padláson." "A padláson olvasok." - I read in the attic.
Both ways are fine.
But with just the existential "to be", only one way is normal:
"A padláson vagyok." - I am in the attic.
( There is a difference between the above two. What is the predicate in each? What are we stating?
"A padláson olvasok" - I read in the attic.
What am I stating about myself? What do I do? I read. Where do I read? In the attic.
"A padláson vagyok." - I am in the attic.
What am I stating about myself? I am in the attic. Period. )
Of course, this is just the basic situation, I am not talking about other cases where the emphasis is shifted and the word order gets mixed up, like:
"Gyakran vagyok a padláson" - I am often in the attic.
So, this situation above, with the televisions, is also about where stuff is.
The icecream machines are in the attic. And the televisions are also in the attic. Being in the attic is also the case for the televisions.:
"A fagylaltgépek a padláson vannak."
"A televíziók is a padláson vannak."
Let's see if I can show an analogy in English:
'A régi, rossz televíziók is vannak a padláson' - this sounds probably as weird as, or even weirder than, this would in English:
"The old, faulty televisions also are in the attic."
Let's pick a simpler sentence:
I read in the garden. I also read in the garden. - this is OK.
I am in the garden. I also am in the garden. - this is weird. Why?
I only replaced the verb. Yet, it is weird.
It should be:
I am also in the garden.
Right?
Of course, this is a totally different structure, I just wanted to show the weirdness factor of 'A régi, rossz televíziók is vannak a padláson'. If it were a different verb, the sentence would be fine. But not with "to be".
Neither of your weird English examples sound weird to me. George is in the garden I too/also am in the garden.
Then sorry, I could not give you an analogy of weirdness.
However, it is still weird/wrong to say
"A régi, rossz televíziók is vannak a padláson."
It is like saying
"The old, faulty televisions are also there are in the attic."
Now that is really weird.
I think that would mean there is an old, broken TV (and it happens to be on the bench). It would answer "What else do you have that is old and broken?"
vvsey showed that this word order is not good.
But, if you say "Régi, rossz televíziók is vannak a padláson", that is fine. Of course, it is a different sentence: There are also old, faulty TVs in the attic.
I only wanted to show that the word order works.
My hypothesis: definite noun+is together does not like being in a focus position.
Yes, something like that. I am not completely clear on this, either. It has to do with the verb "van", as well. Because if you change the verb, it can work:
"A villamos is aluszik..."
"A régi rossz televíziók is működnek..."
I think the bottom line is that the "is" is never tself emphasized, therefore it forces the emphasis on the verb, at least with a definite conjugation. But emphasizing the verb "van" is quite unusual, it only works in a few select situations. This is my hypothesis.
I wrote 'A régi, rossz televíziók is vannak a padláson.' and it was not accepted. If it is indeed incorrect, can someone explain why?