13 Comments
I feel like the distinction between simple present and present continuous is incredibly vague. I understand that their usage in English and Hindi isn't exactly parallel but I think that for the purposes of teaching the grammar with as little unnecessary frustration and confusion it should stick to the mostly literal translation; although ideally the grammar notes should just explain in detail when you do use the present continuous and/or when you're colloquially(?) allowed to use simple present instead.
1456
I wish someone could explain this distinction properly. Here is a lingot for raising the issue.
The only insight I have is that in the colloquial Urdu I learn direct from speakers in daily life, the raha-hun etc is vastly more applicable. It never really comes up to say "I go to school" but we say "I am going to school right now" via like "Mai campus ja ri hun" constantly. But then again that's Urdu speakers and not necessarily about Hindi I suppose.
Shouldn't it be "Raj stands on the chair" ? For the continous form I would expect somthing with "raha hai" at the end.
It appears that as Sam362597 said above, "standing" here is actually an adjective. We have this in English where "I am seated" is a state of sitting, an adjective. We don't have an analog to "I am standing" as far as I can think of, but in the Hindi case it behaves as an adjective instead of as a gerund verb.
- 506
My understanding is that खड़ा and बैठा are adjectives, not verbs, roughly equivalent to 'standing/stood' and 'seated'. It doesn't mean he's in the middle of the action of standing (getting up), it's means he's already in a standing position.
This seems like it should mean Raj has stood on the chair. Am I seeing it wrong?
- 60
Does anyone besides me feel that this is an inappropriate amount of confusion at this stage in our learning?
