"La familio sidiĝis ĉe la tablo."

Translation:The family sat down at the table.

July 1, 2015

This discussion is locked.


Why does the sentence "Sidiĝu sur ĉi tiun seĝon!" require the accusative ending, but "La familio sidiĝis ĉe la tablo." does not? They both refer to movement into a sitting position in a specific place.


Great question. I've written in detail elsewhere and won't repeat myself - but in short -- early speakers didn't use an -n on sentences like "Sidiĝu sur ĉi tiun seĝon!" -- and I think they had logic on their side.


I took "sigiĝis" to mean "became seated", so I wrote "the family was seated at the table", but it was marked wrong. I'm not sure exactly why, though.


I think the difference is between whether the action was on-going or was completed. To me was seated is the result of sidiĝis rather than the action itself; i.e., became seated describes the action of sitting down, while was seated described the action after sitting down.



A bit like the difference between "the family was eating" and "the family has eaten".


I might translate it in English as 'The family seated themselves at the table' or 'The family sat down at the table.'

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