1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Mi sciis tro multe."

"Mi sciis tro multe."

Translation:I knew too much.

May 29, 2015



I bet the Esperanto mafia is a real force to be reckoned with. :P


Vi venas al mi sur la tago de la edziĝa festo de mia filino, kaj vi petas min MURDI?


Mi faros al li proponon, kiun li ne povos nei.


por mono. tio ne estas justeco.


I think "sur la tago" must be incorrect. "Sur" means laying physically on something. I've seen that people often use "je" in the context of time, so maybe "je la tago"?


So Troodon is "too much ode" (in the accusative case), as well as a dinosaur... interesting


...nun mi dormas kun la fiŝoj


kio estis vidita ne povas esti nevidata


La viro kiu sciis tro multe.


So tre is like French's très, and tro is like French's trop. That's simple!


Mi sciis tro multe, tial ili mortigis min...


Tio estas malbonaŭgura


Tial mi mortigis vin!


Mi supozas ke mi ne sciis sufiĉe. Mi nur sciis tro multe. Ĉu tio faras min freneza? Ĉu tio faras min freneza? Ĉu tio faras min freneza? Probable.


Can I say "Mi tro sciis" like in sentences like "Mi tre ŝatas vidi vin", where tre is before the verb?


Mi esperas ke estas leciono nur pri la diferenco "sci" kaj "koni", cxar mi ankoraux ne komprenas.

(trying to say: "I hope there's a lesson that's only about the difference between "sci" and "koni," because I still don't understand." corrections are welcome, as that's the most difficult sentence I've attempted so far, by far)


Put simply, scii is for facts, koni is for people/things. Mi konas Sofian. Mi scias, ke Sofia estas bela. Mi scias pri la libro. (I know that the book exists.) Mi konas la libron. (I know what it is about...) Hope that I said it right and you can understand it.


Yes, but here's the thing (or one of them): When one "knows too much," it's generally not referring to "I knew too many facts" in the sense of knowing information, it's "I knew too many secrets." Maybe that's colloquial/idiomatic? "Mi sciias la faktojn de fiziko." Or...okay, Esperanto treats an absence of something not as a quantity. Multe da librojn but manko de librojn. Wouldn't "mi scias tro multe" be equivalent to "I know (what) too much (is)," i.e., knowing how much is enough, knowing how much is too much? Or is that what "mi konas tro multe" would be? If I know (konas) the book is: I've read that book, I can quote from it vs I know (scias) the book is: I've heard of the Quran/Koran but I've never actually read it...Oh, now I'm just more confused. Some of the things that aren't natural to English come to me fairly easily, such as per vs kun vs kontraux; konas vs sciias, not so much.


Secrets are also facts. Mi sciis tro multe means – I knew too much [of facts/secrets]. Mi konis tro multe wouldn't make sense because koni requires a specific thing (like mi konas tro da homoj).


Thanks. I'm still not quite following because scii is also, apparently, transitive, so it too would require an object. I hope I'll learn the difference as the course goes along.


Do you have any specific sentence where you aren't sure?


Can I also say: "Mi sciis tre multe"?


Nope. That would mean "I knew very much." Tro means "too (much)" whereas tre means "very".


Would 'Mi sciis tro' be okay? In 'tro', the 'much' seems to be implied, as in French 'trop'.


I've seen constructions like "Mi sciis troe" before, but I think "Mi sciis tro multe" sounds better.


This bothers me as well.

I interpret "Mi sciis tro" to be "I knew too much" and I interpret "Mi sciis multe" to be "I knew a lot". These two statements mean different things, after all you can know a lot about a topic without knowing an excessive amount (too much) for the situation at hand and vice versa.


Tro multe means "too much", the tro modifies the multe, not the verb directly. The construction parallels the English sentence. But it is possible to say: Mi sciis tro. – it's just not as common.


According to Wiktionary a definition of "tro" can be "too much", as do other dictionaries.

From what I've seen, and from it's French ancestry, it looks like a yes.


La plena citajxo el rusa komedia filma "Brilianta brako" estas: "kiel diris unu mia konato, mortinto, mi tro multe sciis".


Mi sciis, ke io estas en la domo. Ĉu vi vidis ĝin?


mi scias tro multe esperanton

[deactivated user]

    Mi devis forigi lin ĉar li sciis tro multe.


    maybe i'm crazy


    Oni neniam povas scii tro multe da Esperanto.


    When you learn Zamenhof's darkest secrets so the Esperanta Mafio breaks your kneecaps

    [deactivated user]

      Where is the tense indicated? How would it be in present tense?


      -is suffix is past tense, while -as is present tense and -os is future tense. Knowing this, clearly 'sciis' is past tense as it has a -is ending.

      [deactivated user]

        *scias.. in that case


        why not "i knew a lot?"


        Why not "I knew too well"?


        I think that would be

        Mi sciis tro bone.

        or maybe

        Mi tro bone sciis.

        "multe" usually isn't about quality, but quantity. So here, not about how well (or how intimately) you know whatever, but about how much you know.

        Learn Esperanto in just 5 minutes a day. For free.