# over there: שם, שמה, לשם‎



## אדם

שלום הכול,

איך אתם דוברים "*over* there" בעברית? אני יודע אשר "there"->"שם", אבל אני לא יודע מה "over". גם, יש מילה בשביל זה, כמו הספרדית "allá"?

תודה,

-
אדם
​
Hey everyone,

How do you say "*over* there" in Hebrew? I know that "there"->"שם", but I don't know what "over" is. Also, is there is a word for it, like the Spanish "allá"?

Thanks,

-
Adam


----------



## cfu507

הי אדם, אנחנו *אומרים* מילים/משפטים... *דוברים* שפה *ומדברים* עם אנשים/בעלי חיים/צמחים או אלוהים

Over there can be simply there (sham=שם).
Would you mind to go over there - אכפת לך לזוז לשם

In other contexts it can be something else like מעבר לשם.
Try to write some sentences for example and we will translate them for you.

In spanish allá is שם (according to my dictionary).


----------



## אדם

אז, זה טוב?:

זה טוב שאין שם

תודה,

אדם​


----------



## cfu507

אדם said:


> אז, זה טוב?:​
> 
> 
> זה טוב שאין שם​
> תודה,​
> 
> אדם​


לא ברור לי למה רשמת שאין "שם".


----------



## אדם

cfu507 said:


> לא ברור לי למה רשמת שאין "שם".



סליחה כותבת זה באנגלית? אני לא יודע מה את רוצה לומר. תודה רבה cfu.​


----------



## cfu507

You wrote in Hebrew that it is good that there is no "there". I didn't understand what you've been trying to say.
You can write in English what you meant in post #4 and than I'll rack my brains again.


----------



## אדם

No, I meant "Is this good?:" when referring to what was written below it.


----------



## cfu507

אדם said:


> No, I meant "Is this good?:" when referring to what was written below it.


 
I don't think that it is good. I would expect to hear what you don't have there, an object is missing in your context. "There" is like a place, where something is missing, but what is missing there?
You wrote: it is good that there is no there. What do you mean?
זה טוב שאין שם שודדי-ים
זה טוב שאין שם ...


----------



## אדם

"It is good that there isn't anything over there"
is it: "זה טוב שאין כל דבר שם


----------



## amikama

אדם said:


> "It is good that there isn't anything over there"
> is it: "זה טוב שאין כל דבר שם  (or: זה טוב שאין שם דבר)


Your sentence sounds a bit literary. Another way, more informal, to say it is: 
זה טוב שאין שם כלום


----------



## בעל-חלומות

Also, the זה is not necassery there.

I would say it: טוב שאין שם כלום or טוב שאין שם שום דבר


----------



## cfu507

I just wanted to add that your original sentence "זה טוב שאין שם" can be good as a reply to a question or a statment of someone else, for example:
Your friend: בשוק של רמלה אין כייסים
You: זה טוב שאין שם, תכננתי לקחת את סבתא שלי לעשות קניות
The object is already in the first sentence [כייסים]; you don't have to mention it again, but I would do it.


----------



## אדם

תודה. What exactly does שם דבר mean? Does it mean, "anything there"?


----------



## cfu507

דבר means something (thing, object, matter). for example:
מה זה הדבר הזה שאתה מחזיק ביד - literally: what is this thing that you hold in your hand
אין דבר means there is nothing - אין דבר במקרר של אמי - literally: there is no something in my mom's refrigerator 
ש*ו*ם דבר means nothing. I know that in English we can't use two negative words (e.g., I don't like nothing). 
I'm not sure if there is such a rule in Hebrew, I think there is, but we still say אין שום דבר, לא קרה שום דבר

אין דבר means in different context "never mind" (לא חשוב, לא נורא). For example:
אמא, נגמר האבוקדו
אין דבר, מחר נקנה עוד אבוקדו literally: never mind, tomorrow we will buy more avocado


Edit: when you look up in your dictionary you will find that the two words שם דבר (without Nikud) mean "well known". It is sh*e*m davar, so don't be confused!


----------



## Aoyama

Simplicity bears clarity.
"Over there" is an idiom in English, where "over" is idiosyncratic.
If "there" = sham, then "over there" will be "lé sham" or also "shama" (I think ...).


----------



## cfu507

Aoyama said:


> Simplicity bears clarity.
> "Over there" is an idiom in English, where "over" is idiosyncratic.
> If "there" = sham, then "over there" will be "lé sham" or also "shama" (I think ...).


 
Over there doesn't mean le'sham. le'sham means literally "to there".

What do you see over there? מה אתה רואה שם
My English is not perfect, so I'm not sure if my example is correct in English. I think that in English _over there_ is further than _there_, but in Hebrew there is no difference between them. Please correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## Nunty

cfu507 said:


> Over there doesn't mean le'sham. le'sham means literally "to there".
> 
> What do you see over there? מה אתה רואה שם
> My English is not perfect, so I'm not sure if my example is correct in English. I think that in English _over there_ is further than _there_, but in Hebrew there is no difference between them. Please correct me if I'm wrong.



I don't speak any language perfectly 

If I were going to say* תלכו לשם ותראו* in English, I would say "*Go there and see*" or "*If you go there you'll see*". 

I have been trying to find a way to explain when I say *שם, *when *לשם,* and when *שמה* but I cannot figure out how.


----------



## cfu507

Nun-Translator said:


> I don't speak any language perfectly
> 
> If I were going to say* תלכו לשם ותראו* in English, I would say "*Go there and see*" or "*If you go there you'll see*".


 
Thanks



> I have been trying to find a way to explain when I say *שם, *when *לשם,* and when *שמה* but I cannot figure out how.


 
שם (sham) and שמה (shama) are the same = there
כבר היתי שם = כבר היתי שמה

לשם (le'sham) and לשמה (le'shama) are the same = to (le) sham/a (there)
אל תלך לשמה = אל תלך לשם

I don't say שמה and לשמה, maybe kids say it, and it doesn't sound good to me.


----------



## Nunty

cfu507 said:


> Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> שם (sham) and שמה (shama) are the same = there
> כבר היתי שם = כבר היתי שמה
> 
> לשם (le'sham) and לשמה (le'shama) are the same = to (le) sham/a (there)
> אל תלך לשמה = אל תלך לשם
> 
> I don't say שמה and לשמה, maybe kids say it, and it doesn't sound good to me.



Interesting. I am far from being a kid but I would never say *לשמה, *only *שמה *or *לשם.* 

Let's see:
*1. מה קורה שם?
2. לא, אל תשים אותו שם, שים אותו שמה.
3. היו לי תוכניות לנסוע לשם, אבל לא הסתדר לי.*

*1. What's going on there?* (But someone could just as easily say מה קורה שמה).
*2. No, don't put it there, put it over there.
3. I had plans to go there, but it didn't work.

*When I first read the thread opener I reacted with *שמה *for *over there,* and I still tend in that direction. But I don't think there is an actual rule for it.

On the other (third?) hand, the kametz-heh gives a sense of "moving towards": *הביתה, השמימה, ירושלימה* and so on. I just looked up *שמה* in Even Shoshan, who defines it as *לשם.

*So I guess I'm looking for distinctions that don't exist.​


----------



## אדם

So, can you say:
מה שם?​_What's over there?_



Nun-Translator said:


> [..]
> 
> *3. היו לי תוכניות לנסוע לשם, אבל לא הסתדר לי.*​[..]


 
I thought לנסוע is "to travel", isn't ללכת "to go"?
*Edit:* Well in a dictionary it actually showed לנסוע as "to go with" and "go to" (among other things). I suppose it's likely that I'm wrong about the usage here.


----------



## בעל-חלומות

לנסוע can be translated as "to go in a land vehicle", as opposed to לטוס (air) and לשוט (water). "To travel" is לטייל.

For "what's over there?", I would say ?מה זה שם but ?מה שם is correct too.

The ה in שמה is the "kamatz-heh", called ה' המגמה, and the original meaning of שמה is לשם. But today we use it as another word for שם. So although אני הולך שמה is supposed to be right, it is not, and we say אני הולך לשם *או* אני הולך לשמה.


----------



## elroy

בעל-חלומות said:


> So although אני הולך שמה is supposed to be right, it is not, and we say אני הולך לשם *או* אני הולך לשמה.


 Are you saying that שמה is no longer used with its original meaning of לשם, and is used today only as a synonym of שם?


----------



## Aoyama

I agree that לשם (le'sham) means "to there" (though in English you would just say "go there", the "to" being implied), it may also mean, depending on context "over there" ...
As to  שמה (shama), it would also mean "over there" , the ending *a* meaning _direction _like *le*_. _ לשמה (leshama) sounds redundant to me ...


----------



## Nunty

elroy said:


> Are you saying that שמה is no longer used with its original meaning of לשם, and is used today only as a synonym of שם?


בעל-חלומותwill have to say what he means, of course, but I wouldn't say that at all. 

(Of course I still say _al-hakefak_, so take it for what it's worth.)


----------



## בעל-חלומות

elroy said:


> Are you saying that שמה is no longer used with its original meaning of לשם, and is used today only as a synonym of שם?


That is what I meant, but since Nun-Translator says that she does hear שמה used with the original meaning, it seems that there are people who still use it that way.


----------



## cfu507

Hi, as Nun-Translator and בעל-החלומות said, indeed שמה means לשם. I checked my dictionary (and I can't edit my old posts).



> .... But today we use it (לשם) as another word for שם.


בעל חלומות, you are right, and that's why I thought that שמה and שם are interchangeable, while they are not. I don't say לשמה nor שמה, but I do hear some people say שמה when they mean שם and לשמה when they mean לשם. 
Thanks, I've learnd something new.


----------



## elroy

So, trying to summarize...

שם and שמה can both be used to mean either "there" as in "in that location" and "there" as in "to that location."

לשם can only be used with the latter meaning.

Is that correct?


----------



## cfu507

Hi Elroy,
If I've understood you correctly...
שם cannot mean _to that location._ 
_to_ (ל) +_that location_ (שם) = le'sham (לשם).


----------



## אדם

אז אתם אומרים: "אני רוצה את ללכת *ל*שם" ולא: "אני רוצה את ללכת שם"?​


----------



## בעל-חלומות

כן, אבל בלי ה"את":​
אני רוצה ללכת לשם.​


----------



## אדם

סליחה, אני רוצה לומר "אני רוצה שאת ללכת לשם" (או "אני רוצה שהאי ללכת לשם" טוב גם)​
I forgot that you need to have ש when you want someone do to something. I meant it as "I want you (f) to go (over) there" Or as shown in the other example "I want her to go (over) there." Does that work?


----------



## Nunty

Hi Adam, that is clearer now, but not quite correct.

When you want someone to do something, you need to put the verb into the future tense. So:
*אני רוצה שתלכי לשם.
לא רצית שאבוא היום?*
And so on.


----------



## cfu507

And...



אדם said:


> "אני רוצה שהאי ללכת לשם"


 
would be... אני רוצה שהיא תלך לשם


----------



## אדם

בסדר, תודה רבה. סליחה שכתבתי "האי" לא "היא"​ 
Thanks for explaining it, I didn't know that you had to have it in future tense if you want someone to do something. It makes sense though. Thanks.


----------



## elroy

The reason I suspected that שם could be used to mean לשם was one of Nun-Translator's examples: לא, אל תשים אותו שם, שים אותו שמה. Yes, I know you wouldn't say לשם in that sentence, but I would still consider that a "directional _there_" as opposed to a "locational _there_."

I think my approach was too "German."  In German, you would say:

1. Er ist dort. = .הוא שם/שמה
2. Er geht dorthin. = .הוא הולך לשם (Nun-Translator, would you accept שמה in this sentence?  What do the others think?)
3. Er legt das Buch dorthin. = .הוא שם את הספר שם/שמה

I suppose that in Hebrew the "there" in "put the book there" is not perceived as a direction but as a location.


----------



## Nunty

elroy said:


> The reason I suspected that שם could be used to mean לשם was one of Nun-Translator's examples: לא, אל תשים אותו שם, שים אותו שמה. Yes, I know you wouldn't say לשם in that sentence, but I would still consider that a "directional _there_" as opposed to a "locational _there_."
> 
> I think my approach was too "German."  In German, you would say:
> 
> 1. Er ist dort. = .הוא שם/שמה
> 2. Er geht dorthin. = .הוא הולך לשם (Nun-Translator, would you accept שמה in this sentence?  What do the others think?)
> 3. Er legt das Buch dorthin. = .הוא שם את הספר שם/שמה
> 
> I suppose that in Hebrew the "there" in "put the book there" is not perceived as a direction but as a location.



In my example:  *לא, אל תשים אותו שם, שים אותו שמה*
I conceive of *שמה *as locational, not directional. It is the same sense I have of "over there" in English. It might be similar to _alli_ and _alla_ in Spanish, but I don't remember enough to say for sure.

In your example: *2. Er geht dorthin. = .הוא הולך לשם*
yes, I would accept *שמה* in the place of *לשם*, but would not use it in everyday discourse. Go figure.

I don't have much contact with people whose parents are around my age, but I am beginning to suspect that I don't talk like them!   I am interested to see what the others will say.


----------



## elroy

Nun-Translator said:


> In my example: *לא, אל תשים אותו שם, שים אותו שמה*
> I conceive of *שמה *as locational, not directional. It is the same sense I have of "over there" in English.


 Maybe it's a German influence, but I hear the same difference between "The book is (over) there" and "Put it (over) there" that I hear between "He is (over) there" and "Go (over) there."

What an interesting discussion!


----------



## cfu507

elroy said:


> Maybe it's a German influence, but I hear the same difference between "The book is (over) there" and "Put it (over) there" that I hear between "He is (over) there" and "Go (over) there."
> 
> What an interesting discussion!


 
The original and correct meaning of שמה is לשם [i.e., to there / to over there, directional; I wouldn't say that all the dictionaries are wrong], *but* in spoken Hebrew people say שמה when they mean שם (which is עברית לא תקנית). If I heard someone says "אל תלכי שמה" I would think that he is wrong while he is right, because I got used to שמה as a synonym for שם. I do hear kids say "אל תלכי לשמה" which is absolutely wrong. 
I think that if you want people to understand you, use שמה as שם, or do like me: don't use it at all.


----------



## Aoyama

> The original and correct meaning of שמה is לשם [i.e., to there / to over there, directional


We agree on this one


> I do hear kids say "אל תלכי לשמה" which is absolutely wrong.


as well as on this one too ...
Whereas I thought, in the first place, that you meant that לשמה was right (this being also questioned by Nun Translator) ... (Cf. posts # 18 & 19).


----------

