"He knows neither me nor you."
Translation:Li konas nek min, nek vin.
What's the difference between konas and scias? I used scias here and it was wrong
You've done French and Spanish? It's kind of like savoir/connaître or saber/conocer. You "scii" a fact or how to do something, you "koni" a person or a place.
Thanks, I didn't remember those things from french or spanish, but I now realise we have the same thing in my native language, dutch: weten/kennen
Okay, bad examples then! Sorry, I was just going on the flags I could see by your name. Oh, Dutch has it too? Cool. Cognates with German wissen/kennen I guess? I'll try and remember that when I (eventually) get back to Dutch!
Scii is from the Latin sciere, "to know, have knowledge," while koni is from the German kennen (to know of someone/thing).
Please forgive my ignorance, but at what point does koni become scii? If one knows facts about a person or place, for example. When I say "he doesn't know me" I'm talking about specific truths that "he" isn't aware of. Like, if my response to someone buying me eggs, and let's say I'm allergic to eggs, would I say that the person doesn't know the specific fact (scii) that I'm allergic to eggs, or would I say that the person doesn't know me in the general sense (koni)?
Are you f'n kidding me? I thought that there's one word to know. Luckly I had French and Spanish
Why can't this be translated to "Li ne konas nek min, nek vin"? Does it result in a double negative? If so, can it be translated to "Li ne konas min aŭ vin?" Why?
"li ne konas nek min,nek vin" would be a double negative and would actually mean that it is neither me nor you that he doesn't know, which then would mean that he knows both of us.
And it is also kontraŭfundamenta as rule 12 says that you cannot use NE in sentences with other negative words.
"li ne konas min aŭ vin" would mean that it is one of us that he doesn't know, which then would mean that he knows one of us.
And the intended meaning is that he knows none of us.
In English at least, we do generally default to the "nor" rather than "or" if the first clause is negative. ("Not x nor y" rather than "not x or y".) With "neither" it surely necessitates a "nor", but perhaps someone with a better grasp of grammar rules could definitively say whether the same goes for "not...". ... And whether the same principles hold true in Esperanto!