[etni] Re: etni Digest V9 #289
- From: adriana griner <adrianagriner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 05:55:16 -0700 (PDT)
Dear Debora and Hagit,
As soon as we understand that binyanim are not the same as tenses, we can
understand that we cannot compare them without penetrate the universe of each
language. However, if we want to translate the English passive voice "was
broken" to Hebrew, the "nifal" is actually the best translation. What happens
with "broke" and "was broken" being translated to "nishbar" is probably
that Hebrew do not accept the idea of a table breaking, as the table cannot
break itself, cannot "act". So I think that what happens in general in Hebrew
is that an action that happened to an object is seen exactly like that -
something that happened to something - and not as an action taken by the
object. That's why you have to use the "nifal", when in English and some other
languages you have the freedom to decide to atribute the action to the table
(the table broke) or to someone else or some other phenomenon (the table was
broken). The "paal" (the active correspondent of the
passive "nifal") brings an idea of "acting" that our active does not bring.
Does it make sense?
Adriana
________________________________
     Â
Debora
I guess you wrote in Hebrew
"NISHBAR"- for BROKE and WAS BROKE
and so on...
This is not a case where I would try to compare with Hebrew as L1
Since in Hebrew there are "BINYANIM"
We use the same route (SHORESH, e.g. the 3 letters SH, V, R and we conjugate
them to different BUNYANIN, the BINYAN conveys the active/ passive meaning.
So that the verb "SHAVAR" for active is a different BINYAN than WAS BROKEN,
which is NISHBAR
Even though it's the same route
(SH, V, R)
It's also depend on the SHORESH of the verb in Hebrew
in this specific example the active BINYAN for SHAVAR is PAAL
and the passive BINYAN for NISHBAR is "NIFAL but it can differ due to
linguistic processes.
I hope I answered your question in a way...
Hagit Lahav
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 16:21:40 +0200
Subject: [etni] passive\active
From: debora Siegel <debora.siegel@xxxxxxxxx>
A student asked me why both
The table broke
and
The table was broke
translate to passive in Hebrew --Â
Ã?³ââ?¬ï¿½Ã?³Ã?©Ã?³ââ?¬Â¢Ã?³Ã?Å?Ã?³ââ?¬â??Ã?³Ã?Ÿ Ã?³
Ã?³Ã?©Ã?³ââ?¬Ë?Ã?³Ã?¨
The same holds true for door opened, door closed, bottle cracked
Perhaps there are other verbs that behave the same way...
Does someone have an explanation ?
Debora
Other related posts: