# Να έγραφε λες τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;



## panettonea

A translation that I've seen of the sentence in the title is: _ Could the address be written on the envelope I threw away?_

Is that a correct translation? If so, exactly why does the verb _έγραφε_ convey a passive meaning here, and why is it in the imperfect?  Is this the best way to express such a sentence in Greek?

I would've thought the translation would be something like:  _Could he have been writing the address on the envelope I threw away?  
_
Also, does tacking _να_ on to the sentence add to the uncertainty?  

_Να έγραφε λες τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο;_

vs.

_Έγραφε λες τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο;_


----------



## Perseas

Yes, those "γράφει" or "λέει" are very common. They remind me of the English "it reads", "it says". The only tenses that can be used to express this function of "γράφει" or "λέει" are the present or the imperfect. I think this is a very good way to express such a sentence in Greek. Another way could be "Να υπήρχε/ήταν (λες) η διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο;" You' re right as to the function of "να".


----------



## panettonea

Perseas said:


> Yes, those "γράφει" or "λέει" are very common. They remind me of the English "it reads", "it says".



Thanks.  So what is the subject of that sentence then, since διεύθυνση is in the accusative?  Is it an indefinite "somebody"?  



> The only tenses that can be used to express this function of "γράφει" or "λέει" are the present or the imperfect.



OK.  Does this phenomenon have a name by any chance, or do you have a link that would provide some more examples?  It almost sounds like an impersonal verb.  



> I think this is a very good way to express such a sentence in Greek. Another way could be "Να υπήρχε/ήταν (λες) η διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο;"



That sentence is easier for me to understand. 



> You' re right as to the function of "να".



It seems like να can be used a million different ways.  I bet if you're running low on butter, να could even be used to fry chicken!


----------



## Perseas

panettonea said:


> Thanks.  So what is the subject of that sentence then, since διεύθυνση is in the accusative?  Is it an indefinite "somebody"?
> 
> OK.  Does this phenomenon have a name by any chance, or do you have a link that would provide some more examples?  It almost sounds like an impersonal verb.


Well, this structure is informal, colloquial and I don't know if you can find something about it in a grammar book. It's definetely impersonal structure, we are not interested in the subject of the verb.  However, it is very common in Greek.
Other examples:
"Πες μου τι λέει σ' αυτό το σημείο;" (in contrast, "τι λέγεται σ' αυτό το σημείο" follows presicely the grammar rules and is more formal)
"Εδώ γράφει ότι Ελλάδα νίκησε στο μπάσκετ." ("Εδώ είναι γραμμένο..." : ... the same as above)


----------



## panettonea

Perseas said:


> Well, this structure is informal, colloquial and I don't know if you can find something about it in a grammar book.



OK.



> we are not interested in the subject of the verb.



Perhaps you aren't, but I might be.  



> Other examples:
> "Πες μου τι λέει σ' αυτό το σημείο;"



What do you mean by _σημείο_ here?  Point (as in _point_ of conversation)?  Scene (as in a play)?



> (in contrast, "τι λέγεται σ' αυτό το σημείο" follows presicely the grammar rules and is more formal)
> "Εδώ γράφει ότι Ελλάδα νίκησε στο μπάσκετ." ("Εδώ είναι γραμμένο..." : ... the same as above)



Thanks.  Those are helpful, and I understand exactly what you mean here.  However, it seems to me that the sentence in this thread is a bit different, because you can't simply say, "Να ήταν γραμμένη λες τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;", can you?


----------



## Perseas

panettonea said:


> Perhaps you aren't, but I might be.


I meant, the focus is not on the subject , as when we say  "Ρίχνει καρεκλοπόδαρα" (it is raining cats & dogs):  "καρεκλοπόδαρα" is accusative like at "γράφει τη διεύθυνση", and the focus is not on the subject. Is it perhaps God? Isn't it like in English: it rains, it says, it reads?




panettonea said:


> What do you mean by _σημείο_ here?  Point (as in _point_ of conversation)?


 Or in a text.



panettonea said:


> However, it seems to me that the sentence in this thread is a bit different, because you can't simply say, "Να ήταν γραμμένη λες* η* διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;", can you?


 Of course, "να έγραφε (λες) τη διεύθυνση" is much more common, albeit not 100% grammatically correct.


----------



## panettonea

Perseas said:


> I meant, the focus is not on the subject , as when we say  "Ρίχνει καρεκλοπόδαρα" (it is raining cats & dogs):  "καρεκλοπόδαρα" is accusative like at "γράφει τη διεύθυνση", and the focus is not on the subject. Is it perhaps God?



True, the focus is all on the action.  These are definitely impersonal verbs.



> Isn't it like in English: it rains, it says, it reads?



Yes, except that we don't have an "it writes."  



> Or in a text.



ΟΚ, thanks.



> Of course, "να έγραφε (λες) τη διεύθυνση" is much more common, albeit not 100% grammatically correct.



Well, now that I think about it, if the subject of the active verb is "it," as seems to be the case, then I suppose there's nothing grammatically wrong with that construction.  The formula appears to be:

Γράφει/έγραφε + noun (accusative) = γράφεται/γραφόταν + noun (nominative), which is translated into English with a passive meaning in either case.  

What if you have a plural noun?  Would it be "να έγραφε (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" or "να έγραφαν (λες) τις διευθύνσεις"?


----------



## Perseas

panettonea said:


> Well, now that I think about it, if the subject of the active verb is "it,"


Sorry, what do you mean by "it" in a Greek sentence?  




panettonea said:


> Well, now that I think about it, if the subject of the active verb is "it, "as seems to be the case, then I suppose there's nothing grammatically wrong with that construction.  The formula appears to be:
> 
> Γράφει/έγραφε + noun (accusative) = γράφεται/γραφόταν + noun (nominative), which is translated into English with a passive meaning in either case.


Yes, in the active construction we can think of possible subjects, like "σημείωμα", "χαρτί", "βιβλίο"..., which we often use (but then again the true subject is only the person who wrote something; in other words a "note", a "paper" or a "book" _cannot write_.)  
In relation to the OP's sentence, we could reform it as follows: "Να έγραφε ο φάκελλος που πέταξα τη διεύθυνση;", and now we have verb, subject and object.  However, in this "Να έγραφε τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;" I cannot imagine a subject, since "φάκελλος" functions as adverbial. To sum up both can work :
_1. __Να έγραφε τη διεύθυνση __ο φάκελλος που πέταξα; 
2. __Να έγραφε __τη διεύθυνση__ στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;_
So if we begin the sentence with "έγραφε τη διεύθυνση" we have to choose how we are going to use "φάκελλος", as subject or as adverbial. 



panettonea said:


> What if you have a plural noun?  Would it be "να έγραφε (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" or "να έγραφαν (λες) τις διευθύνσεις"?


"να έγραφε (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" is OK and is what we have been discusssing so far, whereas "να έγραφαν (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" can work only as in 1. (see above): _Να έγραφαν τη διεύθυνση/τις διευθύνσεις __οι φάκελλοι που πέταξα;_

Oh, and something last: _φάκελλος_ is dated, today we use _φάκελος_.


----------



## panettonea

Perseas said:


> Sorry, what do you mean by "it" in a Greek sentence?



I mean that the subject is understood to be "it," even if not expressed, which is the hallmark of an impersonal verb.  For instance, if you say βρέχει τώρα, the subject of the sentence is an implied "it," right?  _It's raining now._  Every sentence (at least in English) has to have a subject, even if the subject isn't explicit.  



> Yes, in the active construction we can think of possible subjects, like "σημείωμα", "χαρτί", "βιβλίο"..., which we often use (but then again the true subject is only the person who wrote something; in other words a "note", a "paper" or a "book" _cannot write_.)



OK, thanks.  The difference seems similar to what it would be in English:

1) _The book says_ to add 1 tsp. of ground cloves to the moussaka.
2) In the book, _it says_ to add 1 tsp. of ground cloves to the moussaka.



> In relation to the OP's sentence, we could reform it as follows: "Να έγραφε ο φάκελλος που πέταξα τη διεύθυνση;", and now we have verb, subject and object.  However, in this "Να έγραφε τη διεύθυνση στον φάκελλο που πέταξα;" I cannot imagine a subject, since "φάκελλος" functions as adverbial.



So in the latter case, the subject seems to be an implied "it."



> So if we begin the sentence with "έγραφε τη διεύθυνση" we have to choose how we are going to use "φάκελλος", as subject or as adverbial.



Makes sense.



> "να έγραφε (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" is OK and is what we have been discusssing so far, whereas "να έγραφαν (λες) τις διευθύνσεις" can work only as in 1. (see above): _Να έγραφαν τη διεύθυνση/τις διευθύνσεις __οι φάκελλοι που πέταξα;_



OK, and that underscores the fact that the subject in 2) would indeed be an implied "it."



> Oh, and something last: _φάκελλος_ is dated, today we use _φάκελος_.



So if I'm addressing someone under 60, I should use the latter.  

What's more, according to GACG, calling the dependent the _subjunctive_ is dated too, but nobody cares about that one, huh?


----------

