- Forum >
- Topic: Esperanto >
- "Ĉi-semajne ni iros al Franci…
32 Comments
Esperanto seems to do a lot of stuff with adverbs that other languages do not. The manner of the going to France, in this case, is "this-weekly." And not "weekly" in a present-habitual sense like we use it in English. But "weekly" as in there is some "week-ness" to the nature of the action. I think... :)
The "week" is describing when they will go. Thusly, it is technically an adverb. Esperanto dramatically improves one's understanding of technical grammar.
Right, but in accordance with the other rules, shouldn't "this week" be ĉi-semajnon?
First of all, it could never be "semajnon" because it's not the accusative, and it couldn't be the noun because ĉi only prefixes adverbs or adjectives.
The second part makes sense. :) I was referencing the tips and notes for the -n ending though, they say:
"The -n ending is used when talking about the upcoming or past occurrence of a specific event:
Mi alvenos sabaton. = I will arrive (on) Saturday."
I thought in this case, the use of "this week" seemed similar.
It seems to me that that would equate to either "last week" or "next week," depending on whether the verb is in the past or future tense, but that it could not be used for this week.
That would only matter if semajne was actually in the noun form. It is adverbial here and does have an accusative nor nominative case.
It can't be ĉi-semajnon because you can't use ĉi with -o words, but you could say ĉi tiun semajnon here.
Mi pensas, ke "ĉi-semajne" signifas "en ĉi tiu semajno" ("this week"), kontraŭ kio "ĉiusemajne" signifas "en ĉiu semajno" ("weekly").
837
With this speaker I have similar problems with li and ili.
Then add in that I'm studying Norwegian wherein the vi means "we" and you can see the sorts of problems I have.
(in other words, you are not alone)
I have the same problem but with Swedish. Ni and vi mean in Esperanto exactly the opposite as ni and vi in Swedish.
Me too!! I've gotten so many things wrong because I've translated vi as we
What is the purpose of the hyphen for Ĉi?
Does it change the translation without?
I'm sorry. I somehow missed the hyphenation of Ĉi.
- 837
It is a way of showing that the ĉi is associated with semajne but only with semajne. WIthout the hyphen it could (though only with difficulty in this sentence) be associated with another word. I sometimes think of this as "partial agglutination" as there are two words, but they aren't fully mashed together.
- 1408
One of the authors of the Esperanto course (arguably "the" author) once messaged me privately to ask me to "correct" the spelling of ĉi which I had written (in a public message) without the hyphen. I agreed with him on this point (and still do, really) and "corrected" my mistake by adding the hyphen. In the meanwhile, I found out that not everybody agrees on this point. Jordan (Being Colloquial in Esperanto) writes a bit about that.
So to answer MikeSanMartin's question, no it doesn't change the meaning and there really isn't a purpose. However, you will often see ĉi written with a hyphen when used with an adverb other than a correlative.
The Duo software doesn't check for the hyphen.
I wrote "will be going" instead of "will go" and got it wrong. What is the difference?
Technically, you're using the "Future Continuous" tense, which Esperanto doesn't have; it only has one Future tense. While you could argue they both mean slightly different things, I'm pretty sure that's perfectly acceptable, so you should try reporting it.
There is a future progressive tense (“will be going”) in Esperanto and it's written using either 'estos X-anta' or 'X-antos', therefore “mi irantos” and “mi estos iranta” mean “I will be going” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Esperanto_grammar#Compound_tense
- 1408
It's not really a tense. It's future tense with a participle. Participles show state/aspect.
If, instead of "iros", it was "iris"? "Cxi-semajne ni iris al Francio" could mean "Last week we went to France"?
So everybody is talking about the conjugation but what's the deal with that hyphenation?
- 837
Salivanto answers that in a discussion above, He's "correcting" a bit of misinformation I had been laboring under.
