- Forum >
- Topic: Esperanto >
- "Mi ne konas ŝin, nek volas k…
"Mi ne konas ŝin, nek volas koni ŝin."
Translation:I do not know her, nor do I want to know her.
64 Comments
For confirmation: is Mi ne konas ŝin, kaj volas koni ŝin. a valid sentence meaning I do not know her and I want to know her.?
I would say not. "And" doesn't seem to make sense here because the second part of the sentence seems in contradiction to the first. I thought this sentence meant "I don't know her, but I want to know her."
First of all I admit that I wouldn't use a sentence structured like "I do not know her and I want to know her", but nonetheless I think it does make sense, because the "and" could be interpreted in the sense of "and therefore". At least that was what I thought, and wanted to know if the same interpretation is possible in Esperanto (and if so it's problematic that "kaj" is in the choices of the selecting problem).
But since I'm not a native English speaker, I'm ready to withdraw my question if the initial assumption was wrong.
You're right; the "and therefore" meaning would work. My ears didn't hear it that way at first.
Nek means nor or neither which are both negative, so separating those sentience would say "I don't know her. I do not want to know her." saying and makes it seem that you want to get to know her but the translation is say you don't know here and you do not want to.
Yes, I thought that was perfectly valid as well. although maybe 'sed' might sound better.
That momment when I understand perfectly what is written in Esperanto but I can't translate it correctly to English...
12
This one wasn't quite fair. The only place I'd ever seen the word "nek" before was in the tips and notes section, where it was only shown as part of the nek...nek construction. I didn't know it could be used only once in a sentence.
- 1470
Mobile users can use the browser on their phones to request desktop site and access the tips and notes from that.
If the phone’s own browser fails to do this (and many do fail for some reason) then try installing chrome browser.
But don't they have computers.... or libraries with computers? If you can't read the tips and notes, it's hardly worth using Duolingo.
Maybe do the Lernu kun Logano course at least, to get some grammar under your belt.
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLl5PRFz0DHxZFcwSHcLDDkVzVq553ULx3
Edit: (10/3/19 - 10 months later): Two readers thought this comment was worth voting down. Suit yourselves. I don't control whether tips and notes are available here, there, or anywhere. If anybody chooses not to read the tips and notes (or a grammar book, or an online course), that's their choice.
Edit2: (6/2/20 - 19 months later):
I think it's worth noting that mobile users might not know about the tips and notes section
For sure - which is why we are here and elsewhere constantly reminding mobile users - and everybody, really - that it exists.
Edit3(8/26/2020):
I do not try to understand the language but instead just use it , just like when children learn their native language.
Se tio funkcias por vi, tute en ordo, sed en la kunteksto, zamlet plendis ke oni ne instruis "nek nek" al li antaŭe. Mi mem ne vidas bonan Esperanton de personoj, kiuj ne atentas la gramatikan klarigon, kaj mi vidas multajn vere bazajn demandojn de personoj kiuj ne uzas Tips and Notes aŭ eble ne scias, ke ili eĉ ekzistas.
I think it's worth noting that mobile users might not know about the tips and notes section (I sure didn't before someone told me to use the desktop version because it's a better experience). If this is your first time learning a language and you don't know any better, it can be incredibly frustrating trying to stumble through and pick up things as you go along, especially with the lives system that exists on mobile. Of course, I would google things if I had to but that's nowhere near as effective as having everything that's relevant all in one place.
I have been learning Esperanto without tips and notes on my mobile and I think it is totally worth it. I dare even say that without explanations, I do not try to understand the language but instead just use it , just like when children learn their native language. But I guess you're right that you should know they exist, if you want to maybe check something.
That would also be correct (and should be accepted), but it's fine to use ne...nek the way they have it here.
Actually, that's what I thought he said in the recording, and it made more sense to me than ne...nek.
I translated the sentence the same way (glad I'm not alone). Seems kinda pompous thing to say though...
Generally:
- scii = to mentally possess a fact
- koni = to be familiar with a person or place
Would these be the same as French "savoir" and "connaître" respectively?
Would the sentence "Mi ne konas sxin, kaj ne volas koni sxin?" mean the same?
It's "koni" here because "volas" is the main verb. Every clause can have one and only one main verb. Other verbs are usually infinitive, that is, they end in -i. The sentence above has two clauses.
- Mi ne konas lin.
- Mi ne volas koni lin.
English is not my first language, can someone explain why to use "do I", in the second clouse? "I do not know her, nor want to know her?" Would it be correct? Thanks
To my native English ears, "I do not know her, nor want to know her" (with or without the comma before 'nor') sounds a bit odd but because the subject ("I") is so far from the second verb. It would be easily understood in print, but most people wouldn't talk like this.
In fact, the much more preferable way of communicating this idea would be as follows: "I neither know her nor want to know her."
Thanks a lot, can I ask one more question.Does it work this way and the same meaninng:
I don't know her and not want to know her. Or (I don't know her and don't want to know her)
P.S. your example with neither....nor is very useful.
Hi, YutYut. Your first example isn't "good" English. But your second example is perfect.
Although English may frequently do the "inferring the subject" thing, I don't believe that such inferring should be present in Esperanto. The original sentence should be recast as ...
Mi ne konas ŝin, nek mi volas koni ŝin.
... if the Esperanto gods want "nor do I" in the English translation.
Do other languages (besides English and Esperanto) do the "inferring the subject" thing in clauses? I'm just curious.
For better or worse, the question isn't what you or think should be, the fact is that this is part of Esperanto and has been for a long time. Here's an example from well over 100 years ago:
- Sed se ia vorto nek estas sendube internacia nek havas por si apartan radikon en la Universala Vortaro kaj esprimi ĝin per kunmeto de radikoj jam ekzistantaj estas aŭ tute ne eble, aŭ tro neoportune, aŭ teknike ne precize – tiam tiun ĉi vorton ĉiu aŭtoro povas mem krei laŭ sia bontrovo, tiel same kiel oni ĝin faras en ĉiu alia lingvo.
I think your modification is more obscure than the original because it puts mi in immediate proximity to nek. The original sentence looks like this.
I:
- don't know her
- nor want to know her
Yours looks something like this. I do not know her - and it's not me who wants to know her.
And it's not "inferring the subject" - it's more like having more than one verb refer to the same subject.
