"La najbaroj invitis nin rigardi ilian novan televidilon."

Translation:The neighbours invited us to look at their new TV set.

June 17, 2015

This discussion is locked.


What kind of neighbors are these who would invite people to look at their new television but not to watch it?


More like really poor snobs


The new TV is just a good opportunity to invite them to talk. After that, they may stay to watch it.


Mi respondis, "The neighbors invited us to watch their new television", kaj ĝin akceptis


You don't watch a television (set), you use it to watch television.

  • "Would you like to watch my new TV set?"
  • "Why - does it do tricks?"


Rigardi = to watch, to look at. Esperantists also use a word "spekti" in context such in this sentence, e.g. "Ĉu vi spektos la ludsportan turniron en YouTube?".


http://reta-vortaro.de and http://vortaro.net say:

vidi = to see (vido = sight, view), percepti per la okuloj.

rigardi = to look (rigardo =look, view), fiksi la okulojn al iu direkto/objekto.

spekti = to watch to spectate (spektanto: spectator), atenti per la vido kaj aŭdo tion, kio estas prezentata. 'Spekti' as a special form of 'rigardi' is less used.


Sounds like something the Dursleys might do.


Wow! You beat me to it!!! :) :) :) :) :)


Your profile picture says it all :"D


Which gives Harry time to sneak into the staircase closet to grab his school equipment for his summer homework.


How quaint! I remember when colour TV came out in Australia. The whole family did visit friends to see their new TV, and then very soon afterwards we had one too! :)


Do people who don't have cable or broadcast TV called the screens they watch Netflix and play video games on TV sets or monitors or what?


We call it watching TV no matter what device we watch Netflix on, but we don't call the device itself a TV. For example, my kids will ask me "Can I watch TV on your iPad?"


Interesting question! I'm sure it varies from person to person. In my case, the screen I use for all computer things is actually a TV, but I rarely think of it as such because I never use it independent from the computer.


I think this isn't settled yet. From my experience, I can tell you that, here in the U.S., many women in the world of online dating -- I would bet this applies to men too, but I'm not looking at men's dating profiles -- specify that, on the one hand, they either don't own a TV or don't watch TV and, on the other hand, will list their favorite TV to watch on their computers / tablets. Which I always find very strange, particularly since making a point of stating that you don't own something as ubiquitous as a TV or automobile is, at least in this country, usually a form of bragging, usually about how virtuous/wise/non-materialistic/ecologically sound/non-consumer-oriented one is.


Kiaj najbaroj.... xD


How would you say "The neighbors invited us to WATCH their new TV"?


.... spekti televidon per ilia nova televidilo.

[deactivated user]

    I would have said "Spekti televidon" rather than using "per"


    Note that you wrote the same thing. He just went a bit further and added some info. The core "spekti televidilon" is there ¯_(ツ)_/¯


    In keeping with syntax, this should be "siajn" televidilon, correct? Otherwise, the sentence infers someone else's TV (and not that of the neighbours).


    No. The reflexive "si" relates to the subject of the LAST action.
    "La najbaroj invitis nin" + "Ni rigardis ilian novan televidilon."


    I had the same question as above. Are you saying that because the verb took a direct object ("nin"), that "(ni)" then begins a new clause?

    I'd thought clauses were separated by ke/kiu/(etc) and expressed an independent statement.

    As in: [Mi kredis] ke [tio estis la ĝusta respondo].


    No. I separated the sentence only to show that "ni/nin" is not only the direct object of "invitis" but also the subject of "rigardi".
    The reflexive "si" relates to the subject of the LAST action. There cannot be "sian" instead of "ilian", since the subject is "ni" and "ni" doesn't use "si".

    This sentence is fine: "La najbaroj invitis ŝin montri sian novan televidilon." where she shows her own TV set.

    Reflexive is tricky to use if your language doesn't have a word for "si"


    I guess where I've always been misled is that I thought the use of "si/sia/sin" was applicable to/determined by the subject within a statement or clause.

    (If you'll pardon the weird impromptu examples) Like: "Li helpis sian (his own) hundon," or "Li volis ke ili trovu sian (their) libron," because "ke" began a new clause with the new subject, "they."

    ... I think what you're saying is that it has less to do with clauses and more to do with the last verb used, and who was the subject (explicitly or implicitly) of that verb?


    The shortest way is to say that "si" relates to the subject of the LAST action. The action is often a verb (salti), but can be a noun (saltado). The subject is only the third person (li ŝi ĝi oni ili). One should follow an entire lesson with a lot of examples about this.


    I fully agree that a lot of us would benefit from a full "si" lesson.

    Thanks for explaining.

    Edit: okay, now suddenly I'm able to reply to you.


    Jaerivus, for accusative, reflexive etc. there is only a simple rule. You need enough exercices, a course with a teacher




    Keeping up with the Joneses, you know...


    La najbaroj ne havas (nek havos) amikojn...


    I played the sound many times and still couldn’t hear the “nin” properly. I knew there had to be something there and guessed right. This happens sometimes to me in English too, so I am not complaining about the clarity of the recording, nor will I report it. In English I usually have a context to make the correct guess. In Duolingo, with a single sentence, it is harder.


    You're true, 'nin' is not clearly pronounced, may be you hear juste its 'i'


    Why is this wrong: "La najbaroj invitis nin rigardi sian novan televidilon" Perhaps the left neighbors invited us to look at the right neighbors' TV?


    rigardi sian novan televidilon = to look at one's new TV set.

    The "one" here is the person or people doing the action rigardi. In this case it's "ni" -- so we would be looking at OUR TV set... which isn't the intended meaning, so it's not accepted.


    I find the usage of "si-" very hard to comprehend, especially because I typically attribute it as reflexive to the subject, which in this case would be "La najbaroj."

    And can "si-" be used for 1st and 2nd person pronouns?


    I tell people that I'm not a fan of grammatical terminology just for the sake of grammatical terminology - but in this case it really helps. Si is the third person reflexive pronoun. A pronoun takes the place of a noun. "Reflexive" tells us that it "reflects" back to the subject. And "third person" means that it's not used for first and second person (i.e. it's not used with mi, ni, or vi).

    The "hard" part here is that you don't look to the subject of the sentence. You have to look at the verb.

    • rigardi sian novan televidilon = to look at one's new TV set.

    What is the subject of "regardi"? Who is doing that action? Whoever that is, THAT is who sian refers to - as I tried to explain above.


    Thank you very much. It's usage like this example that discourage me about whether I'll ever master si.


    Separate the sentence into 2 parts to see more clearly:
    La najbaroj invitis nin. Ni rigardis ilian novan televidilon.


    I thought that might be a link to Frank's TV. I was right.


    invitis did sound more like "invetis" imho...


    it sounds correct with 'i' only

    [deactivated user]

      Got it wrong for putting "lin" instead of "nin," I blame the pronunciation!


      Kie estas la kontrasto inter "television" kaj "telivision set"?


      La diferenco? Television (televido) is an action, technique, organisation to show pictures/films at a long distance. Television set (televidilo) is a device to watch.

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