# Ismersz/ismered



## pacákutí

I have another sentence from a song, so I assume it's correct, but with my beginner logic it doesn't make sense.

Mondjam a nevem vagy már ismersz?

I'd translate it as "Shall I say my name, or do you already know it?" 
But if I wanted to say that, I would turn ismersz into ismered:
Mondjam a nevem, vagy már ismered?
I mean he isn't just talking about some name but he is specific about it: my name. And he does use the definite tense in the first word mondjam.

Also I know it is correct to say for example 'mondd a nevem', but I wonder why not 'nevemet'?
In my language that would make sense because nevem is the object.


----------



## Torontal

pacákutí said:


> I have another sentence from a song, so I assume it's correct, but with my beginner logic it doesn't make sense.
> 
> Mondjam a nevem vagy már ismersz?
> 
> I'd translate it as "Shall I say my name, or do you already know it?"
> But if I wanted to say that, I would turn ismersz into ismered:
> Mondjam a nevem, vagy már ismered?
> I mean he isn't just talking about some name but he is specific about it: my name. And he does use the definite tense in the first word mondjam.
> 
> Also I know it is correct to say for example 'mondd a nevem', but I wonder why not 'nevemet'?
> In my language that would make sense because nevem is the object.



Szia!

"Mondjam a nevem vagy már ismersz?"

The sencentence is correct, it means "Shall I say my name, or do you already know *me?*" (engem) Ismersz here refers to _me_, not my name. Your alternative suggestion  (ismered) is also correct, in that case you refer to _my name_

Your other question: you are right, _nevem _is the object here, but for some reason in Hungarian after 1st and 2nd person possessive suffixes (-m, -d) you can drop the "-t", so both _nevem _and _nevemet _is accepted.

Another example for illustration: "Keresem a kalapom/kalapod." and "Keresem a kalapom*at*/kalapod*at*." (I'm looking for my/your hat) are both correct.


----------



## AndrasBP

Torontal said:


> The sencentence is correct, it means "Shall I say my name, or do you already know *me?*" (engem) Ismersz here refers to _me_, not my name.



I'd like to add a few examples to help Pacákutí understand that if a transitive verb ending in "*-sz*" is used without an object, the implied object is always "*me*":

Szeretsz? - Do you love me?
Hallasz? - Can you hear me?
Értesz? - Do you understand me?
Meghívsz? - Will you invite me?
Megvársz? - Will you wait for me?


----------



## Zsanna

Yes and no... In some cases even your examples could indicate a Subjective conjugation without an object (or the objects of _engem_ or _minket_).

E.g. _Hallasz?_ could mean _Can you hear?_ (i.e. Are you capable of hearing? - intransitive usage)


----------



## AndrasBP

Zsanna said:


> E.g. _Hallasz?_ could mean _Can you hear?_ (i.e. Are you capable of hearing? - intransitive usage)


Yes, you're right. I meant "hallasz?" in the context of making a phone call.


----------



## pacákutí

Torontal said:


> Szia!
> 
> "Mondjam a nevem vagy már ismersz?"
> 
> The sencentence is correct, it means "Shall I say my name, or do you already know *me?*" (engem) Ismersz here refers to _me_, not my name. Your alternative suggestion  (ismered) is also correct, in that case you refer to _my name_
> 
> Your other question: you are right, _nevem _is the object here, but for some reason in Hungarian after 1st and 2nd person possessive suffixes (-m, -d) you can drop the "-t", so both _nevem _and _nevemet _is accepted.
> 
> Another example for illustration: "Keresem a kalapom/kalapod." and "Keresem a kalapom*at*/kalapod*at*." (I'm looking for my/your hat) are both correct.


Nagyon köszönöm Torontal!

It's really cool to me how you can imply the object by the tense of the verb. I had no idea, but your explanation makes it very clear.


----------



## pacákutí

AndrasBP said:


> I'd like to add a few examples to help Pacákutí understand that if a transitive verb ending in "*-sz*" is used without an object, the implied object is always "*me*":
> 
> Szeretsz? - Do you love me?
> Hallasz? - Can you hear me?
> Értesz? - Do you understand me?
> Meghívsz? - Will you invite me?
> Megvársz? - Will you wait for me?


Thanks for the extra examples Andras!

And if I may ask another thing about this, what about verbs that don't end with "-*sz"*?
Would a simple sentence like "Szeret?" work, or would you always have to use "engem" too in those cases because there are too many possibilities otherwise?


----------



## AndrasBP

pacákutí said:


> It's really cool to me how you can imply the object by the tense of the verb.


"Definite/indefinite" is not a tense, it's a verb conjugation type which exists in all tenses.



pacákutí said:


> And if I may ask another thing about this, what about verbs that don't end with "-*sz"*?
> Would a simple sentence like "Szeret?" work, or would you always have to use "engem"


"Szeret" is a 3rd person verb form. If we know who that 3rd person is, it is possible to leave out "engem":

_Én szeretem Noémit és ő is szeret (engem)._


----------

