"A riporterek meglátogatják a politikusokat."
Translation:The reporters visit the politicians.
26 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
Is there a way to distinguish between -The reporters visit the politicians- and -The reporters are visiting the politicians-? The question accepts either answer. Does meg- have anything to do with it, or is that just a normal part of the verb?
This sentence can mean both. You can't leave out meg- or it won't be correct (at the very least it will sound kind of strange).
Actually, without "meg-" it would sound like a habitual action: the reporters keep visiting the politicians. And thereby it becomes a general statement. But that does not mean that "meglátogatják" is necessarily progressive.
There are ways to express the current action but it is more of a contextual thing in Hungarian. For example, if you want to say that they are there right now on a visit, you can say "a riporterek látogatóban vannak a politikusoknál". Or you can express it indicating the time as in "currently", "today", "at this moment", etc.
Because "a" means "the", so you need to have the definite article in the answer as well.
If you mean as a general statement as above = "A riporterek meglátogatják a politikusokat."
If you mean just some reports visit some politicians - "Riporterek politikusokat látogatnak ."
755
Well there goes THAT idea.. I was thinking that meglatogatjak was Lat to see Latogatjak a visit meglatogatjak a visit with and so a meeting ... NO it does not mean meeting!!!! Maybe I am over thinking this!!! LOL
- 1023
I don't understand how to use meg..or why it is necessary. it wasn't very well explained in tips Will it become clear, or do I just stick with it and hope for the best?
Depending on where you are in the tree - I am going top-down, left-right like a book, and the meg- prefix hasn't been used since. This is a "hold it in abeyance". From things I have read in trying to translate, it's pretty important; I see it a lot.
It has been weeks since I have been in this area - I could not figure out what was being said!
meglátogatják - I am halfway down section 3 and this is still the only area I have seen this verb. I tried to recall memory. fail with a burn
What about "látogat"? (He visits.)
"látogatják" - add third person plural definite ending (They visit it)
But meglátogatják is better than látogatják
I believe this lesson’s grammar Tips suggests that this sentence could be expressed as “A riporterek látogatják meg a politikusokat”. What would be the difference in emphasis and nuance in repositioning meg? Is it always an option to separate the prefix, only under special circumstances, or obligatory under certain conditions?
That would put extra emphasis on the reporters - The reporters visit the politicians (and not the hairdressers).
Thank you, Judit, for your frequent and helpful contributions on these forums.
I am, however, confused here. If the reporters visit the politicians (and not someone else), then wouldn’t the emphasis be on the politicians?
In the official translation "A riporterek meglátogatják a politikusokat." - the emphasis is neutral or on the visiting (the pre-verb is still attached). Hey, what are those reporters doing? They are visiting the politicians.
“A riporterek látogatják meg a politikusokat”. - The reporters (not the hairdressers) visit the politicians. (Who is visiting the politicians?)
"A riporterek a politikusokat látogatják meg" - The reporters visit the politicians (and not the kindergarten teachers). (Who are the reporters visiting?)
Thanks again, Judit, for the detailed clarification. So, as usual, the emphasis falls directly before the verb, except that having an attached prefix in front of the verb seems to take away that emphasis.
