# Η Λίτσα και ο Κώστας περιμένει το Νίκο...



## zeldaj

Hello!

Could someone please tell me if this text is correct:

Η Λίτσα και ο Κώστας περιμένει το Νίκο στην αποβάθρα. το πλοίο δεν αυτούς περιμένει.

I wrote it myself using vocabulary from my Greek course. The meaning I am trying to convey is "Litsa and Kostas wait for Nikos on the quai. The boat does not wait for them." Not very elegant I know. 

Let me know if you need more information. Thank you for your help!

Zelda

Edit: Changed formatting to make post easier to read.


----------



## larshgf

Maybe this is better...

Η Λίτσα και ο Κώστας περιμένουν το Νίκο στην αποβάθρα. Το πλοιο δεν τους περιμένει.

unless you want to emphasize that the boat will not wait for THEM.


----------



## Perseas

larshgf said:


> Η Λίτσα και ο Κώστας περιμένουν το*ν *Νίκο στην αποβάθρα. Το πλοίο δεν τους περιμένει.



If you  want to use "αυτούς": Το πλοίο δεν περιμένει αυτούς. But with "τους" it's more elegant.


----------



## zeldaj

Thank you both! I'm actually not sure what the difference is between *τους* and *αυτούς*, I found the latter by looking at a chart of personal pronouns in Greek. Could someone explain? Thanks again.

@Perseas You changed *το* to *τον*, thanks for the correction. My course writes the article as *το(ν)* because Nikos starts with an N, hence why I removed the last letter. I will write the whole article next time.


----------



## larshgf

Τους is a weak personal pronomen, while αυτός is a strong personal pronomen.
The strong p. p. you use for emphazising or contrast. The weak p. p. you use for Direct and indirect object and in some other situations.


----------



## Perseas

zeldaj said:


> Thank you both! I'm actually not sure what the difference is between *τους* and *αυτούς*, I found the latter by looking at a chart of personal pronouns in Greek. Could someone explain? Thanks again.


For each person of the personal pronoun there are two forms, the strong and the weak forms. Eg. _αυτούς/τους, αυτού/του, εμάς/μας, εσένα/σου_ etc.
The strong forms have more syllables than the weak forms (_αυτούς, εσένα_ are strong forms, whereas _τους, σου_ are weak forms). The strong forms are used when the pronoun is on its own, when something is said with emphasis, or to make a distinction. Otherwise are used the weak forms, which occur more frequently.



zeldaj said:


> @Perseas You changed *το* to *τον*, thanks for the correction. My course writes the article as *το(ν)* because Nikos starts with an N, hence why I removed the last letter. I will write the whole article next time.


The standard spelling is "τον Νίκο". The masculine article *τον* always retains its final *ν* in written speech.  In literature or in some texts/emails you may however see "το Νίκο", but I said it's not the standard spelling.

Cross-posted with larshgf


----------



## dmtrs

Perseas said:


> The masculine article *τον* always retains its final *ν* in written speech.



Recent Grammar books (e.g. High School Grammar Book) propose this rule. Older ones (e.g. Τριανταφυλλίδης) don't; they preserve the final *ν *only in the weak form of the personal pronoun (τον θέλω το Νίκο).
Though in fact it's nothing more than a stylistic matter, and even though as a teacher I have to comply with the 'evolution' when teaching the phenomenon, personally I'd go for the old masters' opinion.


----------



## Perseas

dmtrs said:


> even though as a teacher I have to comply with the 'evolution' when teaching the phenomenon,


I do the same.



dmtrs said:


> personally I'd go for the old masters' opinion.


I prefer writing "τον Νίκο", but not as a need to comply with the rule, I just prefer seeing a masculine article -not a neuter- before a masculine noun.


----------



## zeldaj

@larshgf @Perseas @dmtrs 

Thank you again everyone for your help. This all makes sense to me. I remember reading about weak and strong pronouns, but I didn't have anything to make the knowledge stick. I'm sure it will stick now!

Personally I like seeing "τον" instead of "το" just because it's easier for me to understand as a beginner.


----------



## dmtrs

Perseas said:


> I prefer writing "τον Νίκο"



(I answer in English to follow suit and let others understand easier.)
As I wrote, to me it's a stylistic, aesthetic matter, therefore I believe you have every right to follow your aesthetics.
I have to say though that in the specific example you mention there's no distinguishing if there's a final *ν* in the oral speech either, making it difficult for me to miss-recognize the article as neuter just because it's n-less. 
(I must admit that here underlies my personal belief of written language being just a reflection of spoken language -I'm not in favour of the Platonic notion of the superiority of the oral speech that condemns written language as redundant ('a mere mnemonic tool'), though.


----------



## Perseas

@dmtrs
I understand and I partly agree. However:
I do not think that the matter has just to do with aesthetics. Τhere have been inexhaustible discussions in the past on this issue. This rule in Triandafyllidis' grammar had caused confusion due to the lack of consistency, and many philologists and publishers did not even apply it then. Even the 1976 edition of Triandafyllidis' "Μικρή Νεοελληνική Γραμματική" incorporated a decision, according to which the final ν of the definite article should be retained, although this decision was withdrawn soon. The problem was solved by the new school grammar, clarifying that the article "τον" should always take the final ν.
Maybe it's easy for a native speaker to distinguish the grammatical gender of the accusative "φόβο" in "το φόβο", but what about a non-native? This is why I understand zeldaj's statement:


zeldaj said:


> Personally I like seeing "τον" instead of "το" just because it's easier for me to understand as a beginner.


----------



## dmtrs

I really don't want to argue, Perseas; as I mentioned, it's not a big deal to me. It's a matter of what we decide to be correct. So, fine, the article must keep the v.



Perseas said:


> but what about a non-native?



But I believe the written language (rightly so or not) is not written for the non-native to understand (that was the case in Hellenistic times, bygone grandeurs ) 
-if it were we should write 'βάρκιες' or 'χιαίρομαι'...


----------



## Perseas

Καλημέρα
Neither I want to argue with you.





dmtrs said:


> But I believe the written language (rightly so or not) is not written for the non-native to understand


I didn't say that.
This issue has concerned Greek philologists during the previous decades (why?). The fact that a non-native like zeldaj expresses their opinion about this issue, saying what's better for them, is important to me.


----------



## dmtrs

Καλημέρα, Perseas.



Perseas said:


> This issue has concerned Greek philologists during the previous decades (why?).



I believe we agreed there, even if the importance of the matter is assessed differently by each one of us.




Perseas said:


> The fact that a non-native expresses their opinion about this issue, saying what's better for them, is important to me.



Let's also agree here that we see things _slightly _differently -I don't believe that there's always one right way to see things; there can be pros and cons in every opinion, resulting to unavoidably inconclusive arguments. I see what you say, to an extend you are right. I hope you also see what I say (and maybe grant me some credit).


----------



## Perseas

dmtrs said:


> I hope you also see what I say (and maybe grant me some credit).


I've already posted this and I still believe it. It has been a nice discussion so far. 


Perseas said:


> @dmtrs
> I understand and I partly agree.


----------



## dmtrs




----------

