Michel1020 Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5018 days ago 365 posts - 559 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish, Dutch
| Message 1 of 5 11 May 2012 at 3:37pm | IP Logged |
Van veraf zag ik het al misgaan. De stad, die zojuist nog nieuwsgierig boven de horizon uit was komen loeren, naderde ons sneller dan anders, en uit ongebruikelijke hoek.
die zojuist nog nieuwsgierig boven de horizon uit was komen loeren,
Wat denken julie van :
die zojuist nog nieuwsgierig boven de horizon loerde,
of mischien
die zojuist nog nieuwsgierig boven de horizon had geloerd,
?
1 person has voted this message useful
|
blauw Tetraglot Groupie Belgium Joined 5373 days ago 46 posts - 111 votes Speaks: English, Flemish*, French, Italian Studies: Russian
| Message 2 of 5 14 May 2012 at 8:37pm | IP Logged |
I'm not sure what you're asking. All three sentences are grammatically correct. In this context, I'd say the original sentence is a bit strange, since it implies the speaker can now no longer see the city peeking out over the horizon, and if they are getting closer, clearly the city should only be getting bigger.
Between the two other sentences, I'd pick the last one as being more appropriate for the situation if forced to choose, but to be honest, the difference is so close it may be purely subjective.
I do have to say "loeren" is a strange choice of verb here. If this a sentence you wrote yourself, I'd recommend another verb. In fact, the whole sentence rather reads as if it is the city that is moving, and not the speaker and his or her party. Is that supposed to be the case?
ETA: By the way, you can keep the "uit" even if you're changing the tense: de stad die zojuist boven de horizon uit loerde, de stad die zojuist hoven de horizon uit had geloerd. If you take away the "uit," the meaning changes slightly: "boven de horizon uit" implies that the city was originally below the horizon and is now above it, whereas "boven de horizon" just means it's above it, period.
Edited by blauw on 14 May 2012 at 8:46pm
2 persons have voted this message useful
|
Michel1020 Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5018 days ago 365 posts - 559 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish, Dutch
| Message 3 of 5 15 May 2012 at 9:28am | IP Logged |
Thank you for your comments
blauw wrote:
... All three sentences are grammatically correct. |
|
|
Thank you that was the main point in my question.
blauw wrote:
In this context, I'd say the original sentence is a bit strange, since it implies the speaker can now no longer see the city peeking out over the horizon, and if they are getting closer, clearly the city should only be getting bigger. |
|
|
I agree getting closer to the city should lead to the city becoming bigger.
I do not think this sentence to be strange - peeking out of the horizon means all details of the city come to the view one by one when this process is over you can see the all city and from this point the city goes on getting bigger as we are closing to it.
blauw wrote:
Between the two other sentences, I'd pick the last one as being more appropriate for the situation if forced to choose, but to be honest, the difference is so close it may be purely subjective. |
|
|
blauw wrote:
I do have to say "loeren" is a strange choice of verb here. If this a sentence you wrote yourself, I'd recommend another verb. |
|
|
I did not write it myself. It comes out of Averij a text from http://www.city-books.eu/
I have many words to learn before loeren - I do not know how to say it in English, Spanish or any other foreign language and do not use it very often in french.
blauw wrote:
In fact, the whole sentence rather reads as if it is the city that is moving, and not the speaker and his or her party. Is that supposed to be the case? |
|
|
Of course the city does not move - the only city moving I know about is Atlantis in Stargate.
I think this is a question of relativity. It is like we see the sun moving in the sky when we know that we are the one moving - not the sun.
blauw wrote:
ETA: By the way, you can keep the "uit" even if you're changing the tense: de stad die zojuist boven de horizon uit loerde, de stad die zojuist hoven de horizon uit had geloerd. If you take away the "uit," the meaning changes slightly: "boven de horizon uit" implies that the city was originally below the horizon and is now above it, whereas "boven de horizon" just means it's above it, period. |
|
|
Does the uit all by itself implies the was komen ? Is uit an adverb ?
What is the exact meaning of ETA ? Expert teacher advice ? Eigen taal advies ? ... ?
1 person has voted this message useful
|
tarvos Super Polyglot Winner TAC 2012 Senior Member China likeapolyglot.wordpr Joined 4708 days ago 5310 posts - 9399 votes Speaks: Dutch*, English, Swedish, French, Russian, German, Italian, Norwegian, Mandarin, Romanian, Afrikaans Studies: Greek, Modern Hebrew, Spanish, Portuguese, Czech, Korean, Esperanto, Finnish
| Message 4 of 5 15 May 2012 at 5:23pm | IP Logged |
Boven de horizon uit means you separate bovenuit :) That's all.
ETA = edited to add
1 person has voted this message useful
|
Michel1020 Tetraglot Senior Member Belgium Joined 5018 days ago 365 posts - 559 votes Speaks: French*, English, Spanish, Dutch
| Message 5 of 5 17 May 2012 at 3:23pm | IP Logged |
Thank you.
1 person has voted this message useful
|