# ξανακάνω



## qnk

Θα μπορούσα ίσως να ταχυδρομίσω φυλλάδια. Δεν έχω ξανακάνει, βέβαια, ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο.
The speaker has never done such a thing as sending letters. Why then the use of ξανακάνω instead of κάνω?
I cannot imagine a possible reason. Can you help me? Thanks.


----------



## Δημήτρης

It's uh... they way we say that? I mean, yes, I can see it's a pleonasm since there's "ποτέ" in the latter part of the clause, but δεν έχω κάνει ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο sounds like they are defending themselves from some kind of accusation, not stating that they have never done such thing in the past. The verb here will take ξανά- in any sentence I can thing of now. Eg Θα μπορούσα να φτιάξω ένα γλυκό. Δεν έχω ξαναφτιάξει, βέβαια, ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο. 
Can't explain it well, sorry.


----------



## nikial

Es sólo la negación de "Έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο κάποτε." Siento no poder darte una regla normal pero en general si pienso en hacer algo que nunca he hecho todavía, pongo "ξανα" con el sentido que voy a hacerlo próximamente (es decir, no lo he hecho otra vez aparte de ahora que voy a hacerlo).
Igualmente, podrías decir "Δεν έχω κάνει ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο μέχρι τώρα." que significa también que me parece probable hacerlo (pero esto no se usa tanto).
Si dices "Δεν έχω κάνει ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο" normalmente quiere decir que nunca has hecho tal cosa ni vas a hacerlo y normalmente tiene un sentido de que lo consideras algo malo, tonto, que tú no eres el tipo de persona que lo haría.

Por ejemplo:
- Αφού δεν έχεις διαβάσει αρκετά για το διαγώνισμα, μπορείς να αντιγράψεις από 'μένα".
- Δεν έχω ξανακάνει ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο. / Δεν το έχω ξανακάνει ποτέ. (Nunca lo he hecho, dudo en hacerlo pero lo pienso positivamente.)
O -Δεν έχω κάνει ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο. (Nunca lo he hecho y estoy insultado de que me lo propongas.)

Espero que te ayude. Disculpa mi español!


----------



## qnk

Muchas gracias, Δημήτρης , nikial, por vuestra respuesta. Entiendo que es un uso un poco especial de esta palabra dentro del contexto de la frase. Por sí sola la palabra sería _volver a hacer, hacer de nuevo, hacer otra vez, _pero en español el sentido, en esta ocasión, es el de simplemente _hacer. _Diríamos: _Lo cierto es que nunca he hecho algo así._


----------



## Perseas

> Δεν έχω ξανακάνει, βέβαια, ποτέ κάτι τέτοιο.



Firstly, _ποτέ_ is just emphatic. It's use doesn't change the meaning. I mean to say we could omit it.
Let's see the sentence in its affirmative form: _έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο (= I have done something like this__ again__). 
_To the original sentence now:_ δεν έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο ( = I haven't done something like this again).
δεν έχω κάνει κάτι τέτοιο (= I haven't done something like this).

_Is it clearer now?


----------



## qnk

I see. I understand well that ποτέ is emphatic in a negative sentence (δεν έχω... ποτέ). But ξανα-- implies repetition. Repetition of what I have not done? That was my problem. 
Thank you Perseas for your interest.


----------



## slideman

I’ve decided that ξανα- actually means “on another/ANY other (previous OR subsequent)occasion”.  English has no single word orprefix with this meaning, so we have to word it differently according tomeaning and/or context.  (I think Frenchand German would have to do the same.) 
(I had the same problem with  “Δεντον ξαναείδα”.  “I haven't seen him again” is valid but means something else.  “I haven't seen him on any previous occasion”captures the meaning (everyday speech = “I’ve never seen him before”).  The books that tell us ξανα- just means “again” are not tellingthe whole story.)


----------



## qnk

Thank you Slideman for your help. Your decision on the meaning of ξανα- is very convenient and helps very much in applying it to this sentence. Nevertheless the Triantafillidi dictionary does not include this meaning, it only reads: επανάληψη της έννοιας του β' συνθετικού, and this does not help very much. I would like to know if both meanings can be taken, depending on the context. Could anyone from Greece have an answer?


----------



## slideman

¡De acuerdo!  And I’d also be interested if a Greek speaker can tell us how to say “I’ve never done it again” (= I’ve done it once, but I’ve never repeated it).


----------



## Perseas

When we say "δεν το έχω ξανακάνει (ποτέ)" we usually mean "I' ve never done it before".

For “I’ve never done it again” (= I’ve done it once, but I’ve never repeated it)", I would say:
a."δεν το έχω ξανακάνει από τότε" (= I' ve never done it since then). So I would somewhat define when I had done it before. Or
b. "έχω να το κάνω από τότε" . I' m not sure about the English translation, but the meaning is the same as in the previous sentence (a) in its affirmative form.


----------



## qnk

Έχω να το κάνω από τότε could be translated as _I have to do it since then, _but I think the sentence is a bit awkward (Slideman could tell us). "I have to" implies obligation, necessity, the same as "I must". Does έχω να το κάνω implies that I have the obligation or necessity to do something?
Thank you Perseas and Slideman.


----------



## Perseas

qnk said:


> Does έχω να το κάνω implies that I have the obligation or necessity to do something?


No, in Greek "έχω να το κάνω από τότε" does not imply obligation or necessity; that's why I have put it as equivalent of "δεν το έχω ξανακάνει από τότε".

Therefore, if "I have to do it since then" implies obligation or necessity, does not render correctly the meaning of "έχω να το κάνω από τότε".


----------



## qnk

Thank you Perseas. I suppose everything is clear now. More or less.


----------



## nikial

> I would like to know if both meanings can be taken, depending on the context.



I 'm not sure I understand which are the two meanings...

As slideman says, ξανα- means on ANY other (previous or subsequent) occasion. That is to say, ξανα- means one more time, no matter if it is in the past or in the future.

Maybe the best way to understand the use of it, is the way Perseas suggests: If we have done something like this before, we would say "Έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο" and if not, we just use the negative form: "Δεν έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο." And "ποτέ" is just used to give emfasis.

"'Εχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο" means that I have done something once more. It is used either if we are talking about something we did in the past two times or about something we are about to do now that we have already done once more in the past. As Perseas says, "Δεν έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο" means "I have never done this before" (ξανα- is used in the sense that I am about to do it now but apart from this time, there is no other time I have done it). "I have never done this again" needs "από τότε" (since then) in the end just to give emfasis to the fact that we are talking about a subsequent occasion.

For example: "I haven't seen him again" would be translated as "Δεν τον ξαναείδα" (no need to put "από τότε/since then", it is implied) or as "Δεν τον έχω ξαναδεί από τότε" (without "από τότε" it is not clear that we refer to a subsequent occasion.)

I hope I am helping a little and not just repeating the others...


----------



## qnk

Now I see clearer Nikial. Thank you very much. The idea of repetition is different in Spanish. That was it.


----------



## Walkman

If I could add my two cents, I believe that the use of ξανά in both the indicative and negative cases _does_ indeed have a direct and accurate translation in English: "before", as Slideman had mentioned.

Έχω κάνει κάτι τέτοιο. I have done something like that.
Έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο. I have done something like that before.
Δεν έχω κάνει κάτι τέτοιο. I haven't done such a thing. (lit. something like that).
Δεν έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο. I haven't done anything like that before. (lit. something like that).

The first statement is very direct. It is sure. The speaker knows what he has done, and is saying "Indeed, I have done something like that." The speaker knows what that something is, and has the something in mind but does not feel like explaining it to the listener. In the second sentence, the ξανά and the "before", respectively, add a sort of uncertainty. "I am pretty sure I've done something like that before." The speaker is unsure of whether he did the action, when it took place, or what he actually did.

The third line follows the same principle. Except, a bit of defensiveness is added, as Δημήτρης mentioned earlier. "I haven't done such a thing" is a response to "You have done that, haven't you?" Conversely, "I haven't done anything like that before" is more relaxed and uncertain. The speaker is unsure of what the thing being done really is and is distancing himself. This is also sometimes followed by an open-mindedness of the speaker - "I haven't done anything like this before. Can you help me?"

Ποτέ δεν έχω κάνει κάτι τέτοιο. Never have I ever done such a thing.
Ποτέ δεν έχω ξανακάνει κάτι τέτοιο. I have never done anything like that before(, and I have no idea what it is).

As Perseas mentioned, the ποτέ just adds an even higher level of emphasis.

If I am wrong, please feel free to correct me. Implications and subtleties of this nature are very open to other interpretations.


----------



## nikial

Hi Walkman!

Ξανα- only implies repetition (without considering the time of repetition - before or after). It doesn't imply uncertainty of any kind.

In both the affirmative forms you mention, the speaker supposedly knows what he is talking about since he has already done it. If we want to add uncertainty about the thing we have done, then we would say the exact same thing with a change in the tone or maybe using "κάτι παρόμοιο" (=something similar) instead of "τέτοιο" to show that it is not exactly the same.

The difference in the two forms lies in the fact that in the first we just mention we have done something like that in the past. In the second we are talking about something that has been repeated in the past or is about to be repeated.

For example:
Έκανα την αίτηση χθες μέσω διαδικτύου. Το έχω ξανακάνει πολλές φορές. / Δεν το είχα ξανακάνει ποτέ (μέχρι χθες). (before)
Θα κάνω την αίτηση μέσω διαδικτύου. Το έχω ξανακάνει πολλές φορές. / Δεν το έχω ξανακάνει ποτέ ως τώρα. (before)
Πέρυσι έκανα για πρώτη φορά αίτηση μέσω διαδικτύου. Το έχω ξανακάνει πολλές φορές από τότε. / Δεν το έχω ξανακάνει ποτέ από τότε. (again / later than the accion mentioned)

I generally agree with your interpretation of the negative forms. The first is just stating the fact that I have not done it (and probably I don't know how it is done but I am not asking as I am not going to do it either). The second could imply that I am asking for help, but this is because here ξανα- means that I am thinking of doing it or I am trying to decide if I will do it now.

Hope I am not confusing you...


----------



## Walkman

I see what you're saying, nikial, and your examples have convinced me. 

One thing I am confused on - are you saying that in the affirmative the ξανά always implies πολλές φορές, or in order to say you have done it many times before rather than just once you have to include the πολλές φορές?

Though, I still believe that my interpretations of the English cases do surely hold in many cases, based on the intonation. The Greek examples were more of a conjecture and I am glad you pointed out the true implications of the speaker.

I think there is also a problem with the translation of κάτι τέτοιο to "something like that," because "something like that" seems to be a more appropriate translation (in meaning, and literally) for κάτι παρόμοιο.

Thus, in Greek, these two meanings are differentiated. Κάτι τέτοιο indicates a more sure statement, and κάτι παρόμοιο is more uncertain, at least this is what I have understood. Whereas in English, they are both translated to "something like that" where the meaning must be taken by the context and tone. As such, when I was interpreting the English examples, I believed I was interpreting the Greek statements correctly, when in reality I was interpreting the other similar Greek statement that would be translated into the same English statement.

In English, usually if one wants to just point out that they have done something, they would say "before." It is accompanied by a confident and polite tone. Boss: "I need you to make an excel file. Can you do it?" Employee: "Sure, I've done that (many times) before." On the other hand, omitting the before yields - Boss: "This excel file is horrible. Have you ever even made an excel file?" Employee: "Of course I have made an excel file!" Now, obviously, these two cases are very interchangeable. The employee could say "before" in the last example, however that makes the event more distant. When people's abilities or statements are being called into question, they do not want their evidence to be distant. They want it right in front of them. Note that these examples use a direct "that" versus "something like that" which as I mentioned above would change the meaning even further.

The making of these examples has led me to another conclusion: In both the Greek and English, ξανά and before imply repetition somewhat - in Greek by adding πολλές φορές (if there is no από τότε) and in English by adding "many times". However they also indicate distance across time. Teacher: "Have you done your project?" Student: "Yes I have done it. Ναι το έχω κάνει." Teacher: "Have you seen this math equation before?" "Yes, I have seen it (many times) before. I saw it last year. Ναι, την έχω ξαναδεί (πολλές φορές)."

The cases with ξανά and "before" are referring to a term of school that is not the current one, and since the targeted time is so distant, the event can be repeated many times. Lacking these words, however, indicates immediacy - in this term. If the project was assigned at the beginning of the term and is due in a few days, even though this is a long time ago the teacher would still not use before because the event had no way of being repeated and is not distant.

These are still all conjectures. Please correct and add feedback.


----------



## nikial

Yeah, you are right, I just noticed that I used "πολλές φορές" in all of my examples!  Of course it is not always needed when using "ξανα", it's just to say "many times", as you pointed.

And yes, you are right about "κάτι τέτοιο" / "κάτι παρόμοιο"... "Κάτι τέτοιο" is very much alike to what we are talking about, it could be the same as well. "Παρόμοιο" is just similar, it is like that but definately not the same.

Now for the distance. In greek ξανα alone doesn't imply distance in time. For example, you could say "Χθες ξαναπήγα σινεμά" or even "Ξαναμιλήσαμε στο τηλέφωνο μόλις τώρα", no problem with it being so recent. So I think this is not the case, at least in greek...


----------



## Walkman

That makes sense.   

In your examples, these would not contain "before" when translated to English - they would be translated with "again." Yesterday, I went to the movies again. We just talked on the phone again right now. 

   So I will refine my conjecture: distance is implied when the Greek phrase would be translated into English using "before" but not "again." "Το έχω ξανακάνει αυτο, αλλά δεν θυμάμαι πότε το έκανα" I would say this does have distance, since in English it is "before". "Το έχω ξανακάνει αυτό πολλές φορές από τότε" has no distance because this is "again" in English, and the τότε is the furthest event, meaning that the other times are closer.    

What is your opinion on my refined analysis? I hope I am not bugging you guys with my splitting of hairs. I find this fun!


----------



## qnk

Be sure you are not bugging me, Walkman. The nuances of language are sheer poetry. Anyway, the fact is that ξανα- implies repetition and all the other different situations are very personal, varying from adding new words to the sentence to convey the new subtlety, or a different intonation. The hearer may catch the hint or may not but this is a general problem of communication. For me, a Spaniard, this has been very useful as I have acquired a new view of considering the different ways of using the concept of repetition (ξανα-) in Greek. Thank you very much to you and also to Nikial who goes directly to facts.


----------

