"Nem, nem idejön, hanem iderepül."
Translation:No, it does not come here, but it flies here.
34 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
"Jön" is quite close to "come". Motion towards our reference point. This is usually the same reference point we define "ide" and "oda" with, so usually "idejön" and "odamegy" are meaningful. "Idemegy" sounds very off to me, not sure I could say a sentence with it. "Odajön" could work when telling a story - you may use "ide" and "oda" according to your current location and the reference for "jön" according to the main character of the story, possibly yourself at the time of the story.
Prefixed verbs are almost always (if not always) telic. The relevance of this aspect is whether the action is "100% done" or not. This is why they don't have a progressive - the action is not treated as a progress, it's treated more like as a transaction that you can't suspend or resume. I'm not sure you can translate this difference between "oda megy" which is the literal equivalent of "go there" and "odamegy" which is one telic verb that still may take an adverb for a destination.
Tielbert, bad thing is I don't know Ukrainian. Based on my shallow understanding of Polish, neither przejść, nor przechodzić is really similar to any of these words. Iść for megy and chodzić for jár might help with certain sentences but I still wouldn't blindly rely on the Polish words.
Oda- and ide- aren't the most generic prefixes for jön and megy. For megy, it's arguably el- and for jön, it is either meg- (megjön~arrive, as in reach this place) or el- (eljön - the "advent" sense, someone decides to come). "Mikor jön már meg" may work when you are impatiently waiting for a guest, "Mikor jön már el" sounds like you are waiting for the messiah to come finally. If you host a party and you know one of your friends lives far away and is likely to be late, you may say "(még) nem jött meg". If they got angry with you and it doesn't look like they will come at all, you may say "nem jött el".
Also, I can't speak for all Slavic languages obviously but for me, it seems to be a trap to think prefixes in Hungarian are just like prefixes in Polish and to my impression, Russian, Czech and so on. Not only do they separate in all kind of ways that makes them look like special kind of extra arguments of a verb, they are much more commonly "omitted". Or one could say, their presence gives the verb a more special and restricted meaning. This is mainly because of the "can't resume" part.
To my experience, in a sentence like "Who(m) did you send that letter", you would use a wysłać-like prefixed verb in Polish. In Hungarian, using "elküld" over "küld" would sound a bit like "Who(m) did you manage to successfully send that letter".
For each "base verb", there is a subset of all prefixed forms that can keep the main meaning without the prefix as well, that is you don't need to specify the prefix at all, it will be understood (mostly thanks to the arguments the verb takes), and in return, it won't sound "tryhard 100% completion".
Tielbert, I'm glad if I could help. :) The usual dilemma - too many details could be overwhelming, too much simplification could make one too confident and cause disappointment later. I lean towards "Better safe than sorry". Anyways; there will be concepts you can make use of, both in English (phrasal verbs) and in Ukrainian (prefixed verbs). The actual thing isn't exactly either but they will both help a bit. And then, exposure is key as they say. :D
MrtonPolgr, unfortunately DL doesn't indicate the native language of users, as we could speak of some things more specifically in other languages. Based on Ukrainian, I can say that "jo:n" is приходити, "megy" is іти, "odamegy" and "odajo:n" both mean прийти. If you know what I mean :)
But to get any sense in this sentence two different subjects are necessary?
No, HE does not come here, but SHE flies here. Person a does not come, but Person b comes, by plane. Works also with two males, or whatever. But the important part is imho that we are talking about two different subjects.
Might even work in a dialog:
A: Is Adam coming? And what about Steve? He usually flies, doesn't he?
B: No, he does not come here, but he flies here.
Still confusing, but otherwise it sounds like total nonsense.
"Flying" is a form of "coming." Some of us are arguing that jön is a vague word for coming in this direction, regardless of means. Therefore it is a little specious to insist that "flying here" is not the same as "coming here." It may be more accurate, but it does not negate the jön.
This has been discussed 9 months ago - besides, the Hungarian sentence clearly and unambiguously means that. Replacing "idejön" to "idesétál" should be considered, until then, you can just replace the verb in your head if it bothers you that much, the overall sentence structure doesn't depend on it really.
Because the action itself is negated.
[...] nem jön ide - The whole statement, with all the details and context, happens to be false.
[...] nem idejön - The details and the context are okay but the verb is wrong. With some other verb, the statement would become true.
Just like here. He/she does something that makes him/her end up here - but it's not simply "coming". It's "flying" that takes them here.