Remember, the "es" ending for correlatives indicates possession.
kies = whose
ties = that one's
ies = somebody's
cxies = everybody's
nenies = nobody's
I find this table helpful: http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/correlatives.html
It's here now: http://literaturo.org/HARLOW-Don/Esperanto/correlatives.html
Don Harlow died in 2008; I'm glad his work is being preserved.
I wonder whether I'll EVER get these pesky little words into my head! Anybody got any good memory tricks? Or simple explanations of how these words were figured out?
Like: -o endings = things = like nouns; -a endings = kind of thing = describes a noun = like adjectives; -am = like a.m. (time)
I am really floundering here!
Well, two and a half years later ErnaBuber hasn't come back to clarify - and is still at level 8 in Esperanto, so for sure it's impossible to progress without putting in more effort. (Maybe she/he is using other methods.)
I personally recommend learning several phrases with correlatives in them before spending too much time on the table. I see too many people obsessing over the table in conversation -- rather than spending their energy ... conversing.
I don't think that's quite what I meant.
I do not think it's impossible to learn the correlatives without a table. I'm also not convinced that the table is the best way to learn the concepts. (How many English books teach that "-at" means "thing" and is seen in words like "what" and "that", while "-ere" means "place" and is seen in words like "where", "here" and "there"?)
What I'm saying is that people have learned the correlatives the wrong way and then, when they progress to "conversing with healthy constructive criticism" - it shows. If they had started by learning things like "kiel vi fartas" and "kie estas la necesejo" - they would do a lot better when they progress to your "and then."
Aw. Its a shame because I really loved how quickly those correlatives could be learned, but yes, then I see how the discussions won't flow naturaly if you only use them. I wish there was a modified version of that chart / repetative sentence examples that I could compare to eachother. (On wikipedia I'd found sentences with "al" and those will be helpful later)
English is a lesser language in this respect. I have not fully grasped the full difference between tio and tiu myself. But from what I understand tiu refers to a single known thing or person (most likely involving pointing), while tio refers to an abstract thing.
But I could be wrong.
As far as I know, "tio" refers to "that" as of something vague and imprecise. "Tiu" refers to "that" as of something specific, something out of several defined things. I'm a native Spanish speaker, so I understand a little more about these differences. "Tio" would be translated to "eso", and "tiu" would be translated to "ese/esa".
Kio estas tio? Tio estas libro. ¿Qué es eso? Eso es un libro. What is that? That is a book. (We don't even know what the thing is, so we're talking about something vague, not specified so far).
Kiu estas tiu? Tiu estas libro. ¿Cuál es ése? Ése es un libro. What is that one? That one is a book. (As in: here, look at this array of things, then you see the book, without necessarily knowing it's a book, and ask: "Kiu estas tiu?").
I don't know how else I could exemplify that, but I hope it's a little helpful.