si, sin, si mem, sin mem and other difficult things
So I am thinking about how I saw "lavi sin" means to wash oneself and "sinlavando" is a definition of an ablution (which is a washing of oneself). can "lavi sin" be interchanged with "sinlavi"? Or is "sinlavi" non-existant?
Can you say "mi ne intencas mortigi mi mem" as well as "me ne intencias sinmortigi"
How would you say that she likes to play on her own without saying she likes to play with herself and it mean something naughty?
When using "mi mem" and "min mem" what are the guidelines? I noticed a "mi mem" after a preposition, or am I wrong? I saw it used as "al mi mem"
Is this the same with "sin mem" and "si mem" and "vin mem" and "vi mem" for example "li ne pensas por si mem" and "li mortis sin mem"?
I see "min" used as myself and then I see "min mem" to draw attention to the fact that it is myself doing it. I am kind of partial to "min mem" but am I over-using it?
That's a whole lot of questions, anyone game to answer? I would appreciate it. Thanks. -Brian
So first of all, by way of an overview, keep in mind that "si" and "mem" are very different things - even though they are often translated as "himself."
- mem - The king himself will be there tonight.
- si - The king says to himself "I will not be there."
Mem is used for emphasis. Si is used to refer to the subject (when the subject is third person - ie. when it is li ŝi ĝi ili, an noun, or a personal name.)
"sinlavando" is a definition of an ablution (which is a washing of oneself).
Where did you see that?
can "lavi sin" be interchanged with "sinlavi"?
No. You can say "sin lavi" with a space.
Can you say "mi ne intencas mortigi mi mem"
Mem doesn't belong in this sentence because it's not the emphatic "the king himself" or "this very day."
Notice also that you are missing an accusative. It should be:
- Mi ne intencas mortigi min.
- I don't intend to kill myself.
You would not use si in the above sentence either because si is only for the third person. That is, it's never used with mi, ni, or vi. Since there is only one "mi" who can be speaking, there is no possibility for confusion about who the victim would be when he says "mortigi min."
as well as "me ne intencias sinmortigi"
Sinmortigo is generally only used as a noun. The verb is "sin mortigi."
How would you say that she likes to play on her own
ŝi ŝatas ludi sola
I saw it used as "al mi mem"
That's fine. The meaning wouldn't change much if you dropped the mem there.
"li ne pensas por si mem"
This is good. The si lets us know that we're talking about the subject of the sentence. The mem adds a sort of emphasis because most people are expected to do their own thinking. He doesn't do any thinking for his own self.
and "li mortis sin mem"?
This should be mortigis - but in this case the "mem" seems kind of superfluous to me. He killed himself is already clear. You wouldn't say "He killed his own self."
I see "min" used as myself
Yes, and the quirk here is English. "Tomaso sees Tomaso in the mirror" is clear. "you see me in the mirror" is also clear, but English requires us to say "myself" when the subject and the object are the same - even though "I see me" should already be clear.
I am kind of partial to "min mem" but am I over-using it?
If you're saying "min mem" when "min" is already sufficient, then yes.
Dankon Tomaso, Thank you for your kind explanations. I am having fun exploring the language and now I am feeling a little more comfortable playing and trying new things out. Making it my own and not just repeating "kiel vi fartas" endlessly will go a long way in making the language come alive for me. Don't get me wrong, the occasional quirky Duolingoism still makes me MDR.
I have been kind of enjoying some wordplay, I liked discovering "mi sxatas kafon" and "kafon placxas al mi". I also liked discovering "la plej malbona tago" and "la malplej bona tago". It made me think of a Ren Stimpy Cartoon called "The Littlest Giant" which makes me laugh. So I really hope "la plej malgranda giganto" also works as "la malplej granda giganto"; because it is fun to say them back to back.
I really am trying to pace myself on questions, but my list is growing.
I have been looking at several sources. I did spell sinlavado wrong by adding an extra N, I do find when I am typing fast I have to backtrack a bit because I have some habitual keystroke patterns and I think my fingers were used to typing the word "and" and it just appears. Here is where I found that one https://glosbe.com/eo/en/sinlavado
I have been also noticing that when I am writing English now, sometimes a K or a Z gets substituted in some very basic words I have been spelling since I was 5.
Thanks again. I appreciate your input. I expect I will make lots of errors, but I will enjoy myself along the way. -Brian
"Kafo placxas al mi" - no -n.
Does anybody have any idea where Glosbe gets its words? It's not clear to me from the site.
Plaĉi is intransitive (netransitiva) so does not use an accusative (-n). That's why it has to be "al mi". Even if you said "Al mi plaĉas kafo" there's no accusative.
http://vortaro.net/#pla%C4%89i has plenty of examples of this from Zamenhof's own phrases.
Though no idea where Glosbe gets its words.
I'm not sure what was said in the thread that prompted your comment. I thought we had all this sorted out three days ago.
Just to add a bit to Salivanto's explanation (he can correct me if I'm wrong).
"mi mortigos min" = "I will kill myself"
"mi mortigos sin" = "I will kill myself" (means the same thing)
"mi mortigos min mem" (as you wrote, kind of) = "I will kill myself myself" as in "I will kill me (me is the thing that I am killing) myself (I will do it myself, without help from anyone else)".
You could say "I will kill myself by myself".
This is how I understand "mem" anyway. So it is useful if you really wanted to let people know that you were doing it yourself (with a gun maybe), rather than checking into Dignitas or hiring a hitman.