# Verbal focus -in- verbs (nuances)



## meetmeinnyc

I would appreciate if anyone could tell me the differences in nuance between these pairs of expressions below.

Bakit mo ito ginawa? - Bakit mo ito nagawa? 
Pinagtripan nya ako - Napagtripan nya ako 
Pinagutusan nya ako - Napagutusan nya ako 
Anong pinagusapan nyo? - Anong napagusapan nyo? 


Thank you so much in advance!


----------



## DotterKat

First, both the -in- and na- affixes are used to achieve the completed aspect of their respective verbs. The main difference is in nuance, as you have noted. Briefly stated, it is a matter of politeness or directness. The connection between what is _said_ and what is _meant _can of course be adjusted according to the social closeness between the speakers. This can be tempered by certain exigencies such as the urgency to know a certain piece of information in which case niceties might have to be dispensed with for the sake of directness, no matter that the communication is between strangers. Generally speaking, the -in- verbs are more direct than the corresponding na- verbs. Bear in mind that translations are rarely exact when you read the following English equivalents:

1) Bakit mo ito ginawa? _Why did you do this?_ - Bakit mo ito nagawa? _Why is it that you happened to do this?_

2)Pinagtripan nya ako. _He fancied me_.- Napagtripan nya ako. _He happened to fancy me.

_3)Pinagutusan nya ako _He commanded me._ - Napagutusan nya ako. _I happened to be commanded by him.
_
4)Anong pinagusapan nyo? _What did you talk about?_ - Anong napagusapan nyo? _What was it that was discussed by all of you?

_Note that "trip" as used in sentence (2) has a loose connection to the borrowed slang usage originally pertaining to the hallucinogenic "trip" induced by certain mind-altering substances. The emphasis is on the temporary but intense nature of such a "trip" and as used in your Tagalog text would best translate as a strong, but temporary, liking or fancy for someone.


----------



## meetmeinnyc

Thanks so much!

I just thought of this, but could 'Bakit mo ito nagawa' possiby mean 'How could you do this to me?' as well? Or is there another way of saying that?

Thanks again.


----------



## DotterKat

meetmeinnyc said:


> Thanks so much!
> 
> I just thought of this, but could 'Bakit mo ito nagawa' possiby mean 'How could you do this to me?' as well? Or is there another way of saying that?
> 
> Thanks again.



How could you do this _to me_? = Bakit mo ito nagawa _sa akin_?


----------



## meetmeinnyc

Got it. Thanks!


----------



## meetmeinnyc

Hi,

I need your help again with this sentence related to the topic..

*Kahit sa ulan ay pagkain pa rin ang naiisip ko. 

Why is 'naiisip' used here instead of 'iniisip'? If you use 'iniisip' here, would the meaning change big time?


Thanks!


----------



## DotterKat

meetmeinnyc said:


> Hi,
> 
> I need your help again with this sentence related to the topic..
> 
> *Kahit sa ulan ay pagkain pa rin ang naiisip ko.
> 
> Why is 'naiisip' used here instead of 'iniisip'? If you use 'iniisip' here, would the meaning change big time?
> 
> 
> Thanks!



No, the meaning would be the same at least in everyday Tagalog speech. Linguistically, it can be parsed into finer detail as the affixes _-in-_ and _na-_ bestow nuances that may get lost in translation.

Both iniisip and naiisip are in the uncompleted aspect (ongoing actions).
Both are object-directed. Ano ang iniisip niya? Pagkain. Ano ang naiisip niya? Pagkain.
However, na- is also an abilitive or potentiative prefix, denoting the _ability or potential to do something,_ in this case the ability to think of something, one particular thing among many (pagkain).
Iniisip is, in a way, more object-directed and does not carry the nuance of alternative things to think about as much as naiisip does (i.e. the ability or potential to think of other things).
Therefore the subtlety here lies in the question of what one is actually thinking about (iniisip) and what one chooses among many things to think about (naiisip).

Kahit sa ulan ay pagkain pa rin ang naiisip ko. Even in the rain, it's still food that I can think of. 
(I could possibly be thinking about my loving husband, my lovely children, how I could grab a cab in this frightful weather, whether or not I should have worn these shoes today, but all I can think of is food. Probably because I missed breakfast).

Kahit sa ulan ay pagkain pa rin ang iniisip ko. Even in the rain, it's still food that I think of.
(This carousel of chicken wings and hamburgers keeps spinning around my head all the time. I think of food _all the time_.)

These differences of course will only come up in linguistic discussions. Normally, one would not make such fine distinctions.


----------



## meetmeinnyc

I see.. My understanding about the difference between the ma-form and the in-form is getting even clearer.

Thanks so much!


----------

