'este' is used as 'is' is used in English, but is it a fair exact definition?
It seems to be the case that 'sunt' is more diverse that the English 'am'.
You say 'I am' and 'they are' in English.
In Romanian you say 'I am' as 'eu sunt', and 'they are' as 'ei/ele sunt'. You of course do not say 'they am' in English.
So, in consideration of the above . . .
'sunt' = 'am'
. . . is not accurate.
How about . . .
'este' = 'is'
. . . would you say that is accurate?
I'm qualified as a language teacher, and we were taught never to use the equals sign (=) when writing definitions/translations, as the process of translating is an inexact process. Still, it's so tempting to look for an exact translation, and it would be ever so convenient :-)
3 Comments This discussion is locked.
'sunt' works for first person singular and third person plural in Romanian, 'am' works only for first person singular in English
'este' works only for third person singular in Romanian, so it will always translate as 'is' and viceversa
"Sunt" just happens to be the present tense 1st person singular & 3rd person plural conjugation of the verb "a fi."
When translating to English from Romanian you need to be mindful of the context, as personal pronouns can be omitted in speech as well as in writing.
So, "sunt" can be translated as "I am/ They are," depending on the context.