1. Forum
  2. >
  3. Topic: Esperanto
  4. >
  5. "Where do you like to sit?"

"Where do you like to sit?"

Translation:Kie vi ŝatas sidi?

June 1, 2015



Why isn't it "kien"?


Kie is not the object of the sentence, it's an adverb of place. Also, sidi is an intransitive word, which means it can't have an object. (you can't say "I sit something" in English either)

Also, practically speaking "kien" means "where to" (a destination). For example:
Kie vi kuras? (Where are you running? - e.g. on the road)
Kien vi kuras? (Where to are you running? - e.g. to the park)

This is also possible with other phrases. As Wikipedia explains:

A frequent use of the accusative is in place of al (to) to indicate the direction or goal of motion (allative construction). It is especially common when there would otherwise be a double preposition:

la kato ĉasis la muson en la domo (the cat chased the mouse in [inside of] the house)
la kato ĉasis la muson en la domon (the cat chased the mouse into the house).


"Kie vi ŝatas sidi" = Where do you like to be sitting, static location.

"Kien vi ŝatas sidi" = Where do you like to sit TO. Normally this sentence wouldn't make sense since you don't move when you sit, since it implies you're in transit to another location while performing the sitting action. However, it can actually be used, maybe in a bit of strange context, with the point of sitting in a vehicle that is moving. (Train, plane, etc.)


I'm wondering the same thing.


It didn't accept volas instead if sxatas. Is volas considered to be the wrong word to use here?


I thought the same, but I think volas would mean the very same thing if the question were "Where would you like to sit?"... "Where do you like to sit?" could also be a question asking about favourite places to sit or something.


Looks like you found my error! For some reason, my mind did indeed see it as "Where would you like to sit?". Really weird that I didn't notice that until you pointed it out. (By the way, what would "Where would you like to sit?" be in Esperanto?)


Kie vi ŝatus sidi?


That would be: "Where do you want to sit?" But, they're not offering you a seat; they just want to know your favourite place to sit. "Where do you like to sit?" E.g., that way they'll know where to hang the decorations when it's your birthday.


Kie vi sxatas sidi vin? Why isn't it correct?


Because it means "Where do you like to sit you?" which does not make sense. ;) In some languages (e.g. German), "to sit down" is used like this ("to sit oneself", "sich hinsetzen"), but not in Esperanto (or English, for that matter).


Why is it wrong to have a ĉu in place of "do"?


The question starts with the word "Kie", rendering the inclusion of the word "Cxu" to be unnecessary. Since both words are "question starters" in Esperanto, "Kie" also renders the inclusion of the word "Cxu" to be redundant. The meaning of the word "Cxu" in Esperanto is actually closer to the meaning of the word "Whether" in English. If you wanted to ask about where someone would like to sit using a "Cxu" format, one could ask, "Cxu vi sxatus sidi tie?" to ask whether or not you would like to sit there (which would likely be specified by way of some kind of gesture) or else "Cxu vi sxatus sidi apud mi?" to ask whether or not you would like to sit next to them. An example that more directly uses the word "cxu" the way an English speaker would use whether is "Sxi konsideris cxu iri aux ne iri," which means, "She considered whether to go or not to go."


I appreciate your comprehensive reply. I did realize that "ĉu" was redundant with the presence of "kie"; the issue was more that I did not know how to think about what function "ĉu" performed, because almost all of the Duolingo practice sentences with "ĉu" placed it in the front, as if it was a correlative of the kie, kio, kia type! But now that I can map it to "whether" in my head, I think I even know how to use "ĉu" in the middle of the sentence now.

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