"I think I have to open it."

Translation:Mi pensas, ke mi devas malfermi ĝin.

June 24, 2015

This discussion is locked.


why does the "ke" have to be there?


In english you say "I think that I have to open it" but you can omit "that".In Esperanto must keep "ke".


My understanding is that you can only have one verb per clause, so you have to start another clause with the "ke" in order to introduce another verb(unless you're following the first verb with an infinitive). i.e. you can't say "Mi pensas mi devas" because the two present-tense verbs run into each other.

Mi estas komencanto....so I could be way off base here. : )


I'm wondering the same thing. I hope a Esperantisto answers your question.


For no reason I still find it odd that the 'mal' is to open and not to close.


Why 'devas' rather than 'bezonas'


Because bezoni means "to need".


Devi also means "to need", but more in the sense of "must". Grammatically, the biggest difference is that bezoni is transitive (it takes a direct object). So "Mi devas mangxi", but "Mi bezonas mangxajxon".


Kiam vi bezonas, vi devas. Kiam vi devas, vi ne ĉiam bezonas.

Plie, vi ne devas havi o-vorton post "bezoni"; ankaŭ i-verbon vi povas uzi.

You can say "mi bezonas manĝi". Saying "mi devas manĝi" we don't know if you need to or if someone makes you do it against your will.


Why not "malfermu"?


That's the imperative form. If you wanted to tell somebody to open a door, you could say "malfermu la pordon", for example.


Right. But there were some examples where imperative was used that would not be considered imperative in English, and this sentence seemed to fit that structure really well. I think it was something of the form "You must close the door!", which is very similar to "Close the door!". I'll try to find the particular example.


See Lesson 10 of The Esperanto Teacher: A Simple Course for Non-Grammarians (H. Fryer) for examples.


Does Esperanto allow us to construct this sentence without a relative conjunction ? In French, I could say either "je pense que je dois l'ouvrir" or "je pense devoir l'ouvrir". Does Esperanto allow us to say, "mi pensas devi malfermi ĝin"?


[fr] En français, l'infinitif après "penser" signifie soit que l'on tient quelque chose pour vrai, ou pour exprimer une intention. En espéranto, utilisez "ke" pour le premier et un infinitif pour le second. "Mi pensas ke mi dormas" = Je pense que je dors. "Mi pensas dormi" = Je compte dormir.

[en] In Esperanto, use "ke" to mean you think something is real, and an infinitive to express intent. "Mi pensas ke mi dormas" = I think I'm sleeping. "Mi pensas dormi" = I think of sleeping/I intend to sleep.


Why not "Mi pensas, ke mi devus malfermi gxin" ?


That would be the conditional form and what is the condition? "I think that I would have to open it, if you were coming." "Mi pensas, ke mi devus malfermi ĝin, se vi venus." http://en.lernu.net/lernado/gramatiko/konciza/verbformoj.php http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/rules.html#verbs


La US-finajxo ne nur estas uzata kun se, kun kondicxo. Mi pensis, ke la US-finajxo povus (^^) esti uzata, kiam oni esprimas penson ; mi pensis, ke, se "mi pensas" estus uzata, la US-finajxo povus estis uzata. Cxu mi estas komprenebla ?


Se vi uzis la Esperanta kondicionalo, mi ne uzus la prezenco en la angla por traduki ĝin. Supre, la frazo uzata la prezenco kun nenio por indiki ion malsama de la prezenco. Angla ne uzas la kondiĉa tiel kiel en aliaj lingvoj.

Mi pensas ke vi pensu la modo subjunktivo. The subjunctive form is used when something is not a fact, such as for thoughts. Yet some thoughts are about facts in which case the indicative present would be used. Oddly, Esperanto uses the "moda ordona" for the subjunctive form. "I think that the painting looks strange." could definitely be subjective. "Mi pensas ke la pentraĵo aspektas stranga." could be written as "Mi pensas ke la pentraĵo aspektu stranga." if indeed it is quite a beautiful painting that only appears strange to me. 

I find this use to be strange, but then I suppose you could be attracting attention to it and inviting them to look at it and see if they agree with you. I wonder if that is how they came to use this mood or if it is simply the lack of subjunctive in Esperanto and the ease with which you can tell that the moda ordona is not actually being used in the imperative here. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_subjunctive http://donh.best.vwh.net/Esperanto/rules.html#verbs


This makes nk sense. I said "mi havi" to say "I have to". That is correct. Why would I have to say "ke mi devas" instead?????


In English we use "have to" interchangeably with "must" but in other languages "have" is only used for possession. You used the infinitive form "havi" which means "to have" as in "to possess" and not "have to" whose infinitive form would be "to have to". Sometimes you cannot translate one word for one word. The English expression must be translated to the word that will give the correct meaning which is "devi" in present tense "devas". http://esperanto-panorama.net/vortaro/eoen.htm


Mi havis la saman demandon, dankon por la granda respondo. (I'm sure I've made a mess of the Esperanto.) I had the same question, thanks for the great answer.

[deactivated user]

    There is no object. There is an object. It has to be destroyed, when the countdown stops. We are doing great work. We have to be stopped.


    So if I understand use of ke

    Would this be right mi vidas , ke la pordo fermas


    "Ĝin" references something the speaker, or someone he's talking with, already mentioned. It's the role of "it" in the English sentence.

    "Tion" would reference something the speaker is pointing at. It would be "that" in English.

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