Language |
|
|
|
Continuing and Temporary Actions
|
1. |
01 Feb 2012 Wed 04:40 pm |
It seems that in English the division of labour between verb forms is somehow upside down in sentences like
The Sphinx stands by the Nile
Mr Smith is standing by the Nile.
The temporary stop of Mr Smith is expressed with a progressive verb form while the patience of the stone takes the basic form of the verb. In the same manner, the English "live in a place" but "are staying at a hotel".
Türkçesi ne acaba.
|
|
2. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 01:09 pm |
Here is the Turkish viewpoint on the matter: The stop of both Sfenks and Smith Bey is temporary although the stone has a greater patience
Here are the Turkish equivalents of your sentences:
Sfenks, Nil´in kenarında duruyor.
Smith Bey, Nil´in kenarında duruyor.
In both sentences the verb is in -yor form..
But for example when added -ken, it changes into aorist tense..
Bu resim, Smith Bey Nil´in kenarında dururken çekildi - this picture was taken while Mr Smith was standing by the Nil
-yorken is possible also but rarely preferred..
Here is a good example for literalists and grammar lovers
Dilbilgisi kitabını çalışırken uykuya daldı - she dove into sleep while studying her grammar book.
Edited (2/2/2012) by scalpel
Edited (2/2/2012) by scalpel
|
|
3. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 01:56 pm |
I have just read such interesting things about –(i)yor and Turkish aspect in general. There was no way to fall asleep.
The example shows that even though both Turkish and English have a progressive - or continuous verb form, however we want to call it - they do not always function the same way and connecting them together may lead into confusion.
It’s interesting that you brought up iken here. It also denotes a continuing situation, a state rather than an action. Maybe that’s why it feels good next to aorist which doesn’t obstruct the meaning of a stable situation but doesn’t stress it any more than necessary.
iken can combine with just about anything. Except –di-past. I think it is in conflict with –di- because a verb + -di- always makes perfective aspect, i.e. shows the action as having a clear beginning and a clear end like Odaya girdim ‘I entered the room’. But this is my speculating only.
|
|
4. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 05:10 pm |
iken can combine with just about anything. Except –di-past. I think it is in conflict with –di- because a verb + -di- always makes perfective aspect, i.e. shows the action as having a clear beginning and a clear end like Odaya girdim ‘I entered the room’. But this is my speculating only.
Agent provocateur!
Your "speculating" anyway I liked..
Yes, -di makes an act dead never to arise
As there is no life sign in -di form of verbs, adding -ken to it is unreasonable..
Edited (2/2/2012) by scalpel
|
|
5. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 09:35 pm |
Yes, -di makes an act dead never to arise
Yes, that´s what happens. These actions go to their grave until doomsday and then they will be scaled.
Edited (2/2/2012) by Abla
[Sorry, I sent it before it was ready. Still thinking.]
|
|
6. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 10:32 pm |
Look at this sentence:
Paralarını kasada saklıyor. ´He keeps his money in the deposit box.´
If I wanted to change it into the past without changing anything else but the tense, would it be
Paralarını kasada sakladı
or
Paralarını kasada saklıyordu
or something else?
Is it possible to say
?Paralarını kasaya sakladı ´He put his money to the deposit box´ ?
|
|
7. |
02 Feb 2012 Thu 10:57 pm |
Look at this sentence:
Paralarını kasada saklıyor. ´He keeps his money in the deposit box.´
If I wanted to change it into the past without changing anything else but the tense, would it be
Paralarını kasada sakladı
or
Paralarını kasada saklıyordu
or something else?
Is it possible to say
?Paralarını kasaya sakladı ´He put his money to the deposit box´ ?
The past of "paralarını kasada saklıyor" is "paralarını kasada saklıyordu" (yor+du )
The past of "paralarını kasada saklar" is "paralarını kasada saklardı" (r+di )
"paralarını kasada sakladı" is past of nothing.. it is past on its own
But... "he kept his money in the deposit box" can be translated in Turkish either as "paralarını kasada sakladı" or "paralarını kasada saklıyordu" depending on the context.. This really will be an intersting topic to open..
Yes, paralarını kasaya sakladı => he put his money to the deposit box
|
|
8. |
03 Feb 2012 Fri 12:20 am |
Yes, paralarını kasaya sakladı => he put his money to the deposit box
What made me suspect this was the model of intransitive verbs like yatmak which express an event (‘going to bed’ ) in some forms and a state (‘staying in horizontal position’ ) in their other forms. At least uyumak and oturmak behave the same way, I can’t remember more now but I´m sure there are. In a way the transitive saklamak shows the same difference here.
Isn’t it funny that there is this pure past sakladı in addition to saklıyordu and saklardı? It shows that the aorist –r and progressive –yor are relative tenses, they get their final meaning from the presence or absence of past tense –di. Instead, -di expresses absolute time and can manage on its own.
But... "he kept his money in the deposit box" can be translated in Turkish either as "paralarını kasada sakladı" or "paralarını kasada saklıyordu" depending on the context..
Sorry but I can´t leave this in peace. Is it possible to explain their difference in a simple manner?
Am I by any chance being dull or something?
Edited (2/3/2012) by Abla
|
|
9. |
03 Feb 2012 Fri 01:02 am |
Abla I think you keep the native speakers on their "proverbial" toes. (Are you familiar with that expression in English?) with your topics, and questions.
Though I have a feeling they don´t mind when you keep adding another question. Because as learners, we both know that so many times, the answer to one question or confusing grammar subject will inspire more questions. It shows how deeply we we understand (what we´ve already learned) and want to understand more of the language.
|
|
10. |
03 Feb 2012 Fri 01:01 pm |
I know, Mavili, and I have a bad conscience about that. I would love to be funny, light and easy-going but it just doesn´t work that way with me. I just get excited about something and want to clear it. On some level I am aware of the problem but it is hard to brake.
Thanks for talking straight. You really lighten the whole classroom, Mavili.
|
|
11. |
04 Feb 2012 Sat 09:14 pm |
But... "he kept his money in the deposit box" can be translated in Turkish either as "paralarını kasada sakladı" or "paralarını kasada saklıyordu" depending on the context..
Sorry but I can´t leave this in peace. Is it possible to explain their difference in a simple manner?
In a simple manner?.. I will give a go.. but not sure if I am able to explain.. first I need a book to steal some sentences from
Well.. I found a book.. a novel.. If I were the translator (luckily I am not!) I would translate these sentences as...
1. -di
When the cook appeared I ran to her. She took me into her arms and kissed me.
Aşçı görününce ona doğru koştum. Beni kollarının arasına alıp öptü.
My mother showed me my room. It was small, next to her own and it had a window which reached from the ceiling to the floor. It was discreetly but tastefully furnished.
Annem bana odamı gösterdi. Onun kendi odasına bitişik ve tavandan yere kadar bir camı olan küçük bir odaydı. İddiasız ama zevkli döşenmişti.
2. -yordu*
He kept a book of a quatations from the great Chinese writers by his bedside and he used to study them before he slept.
Yatağının başucunda içinde büyük Çinli yazarlardan alıntı sözlerin olduğu bir kitap bulunduruyor ve o alıntıları yatmadan önce gözden geçiriyordu.
I went there often because I wondered whether X had disobeyed me and had brought Y to see Z there. I half hoped I would find Z and I half feared to.
X´in bana itaatsizlik edip etmediğini ve Y´yi Z görsün diye getirip getirmediğini merak ettiğimden oraya sık sık gidiyordum. Belki Z ile karşılaşırım diye bir yandan umutlanırken bir yandan da bundan korkuyordum.
*Depending on the context you can also use aorist+di past. (giderdim, korkardım,.. )
Did you see the difference? Or I failed badly on it?
|
|
12. |
04 Feb 2012 Sat 09:42 pm |
It is the difference between perfective (done, finished, packaged, dead, forever gone) action and the past habitual action. I can see it from a distance. Thank you for your effort, scalpel.
Psst. What one really can´t understand is the English -ing forms which they drop to strange places but that is not our concern...
|
|
13. |
21 Feb 2012 Tue 11:25 am |
Kendimi bildim bileli çok arkadaşım var.
If I put vardı there instead would it mean that I don´t have friends any more? And what influence does the adverbial have on the meaning: if there was none
Çok arkadaşlarım var
would I be talking about present moment only or is any past included?
|
|
14. |
21 Feb 2012 Tue 09:40 pm |
Kendimi bildim bileli describes a long period of time that begins back from where your memories start and lasts up to now..You can say
Kendimi bildim bileli çok arkadaşım var.
But you cannot use vardı in place of var..It wouldn´t be logical.. Simple sentences work better:
Eskiden çok arkadaşım vardı.. Artık hiç arkadaşım yok..
Çok arkadaşlarım var
You would be talking about present moment only..
(Don´t use plural after çok.. )
..
Arkadaşım var (one friend)
Arkadaşlarım var (more than one friend)
Çok arkadaşım var ( a lot of friends)
Edited (2/21/2012) by scalpel
|
|
15. |
21 Feb 2012 Tue 10:58 pm |
´I have always had a lot of friends (and I still have).´ How can I say it preferably without the part in brackets, just using verb forms?
Sorry, this looks like spamming (acute will react after a while) but I don´t understand the tense of idi when attached to an adjective.
|
|
16. |
22 Feb 2012 Wed 12:19 am |
´I have always had a lot of friends (and I still have).´ How can I say it preferably without the part in brackets, just using verb forms?
Sorry, this looks like spamming (acute will react after a while) but I don´t understand the tense of idi when attached to an adjective.
The pattern you are looking for is:
Hep çok arkadaşım oldu (both past and present)
You can use her zaman in place of hep..
Her zaman çok arkadaşım oldu
You "..don´t undersatnd the tense of idi when attached to an adjective"... really?
|
|
17. |
22 Feb 2012 Wed 08:25 am |
What is so strange about it? Past tense -di attached to a verb gives a different tense and aspect than idi attached to a noun or adjective. V + -di is a finished action, N + idi still continues. Your sentences show this.
Got it now. Thank you, scalpel.
|
|
|