...se pot transforma oricând î scenarii...

chatkigazouille

Senior Member
Indonesian
Hello all!

I am reading a news article about places and weather and am trying to figure out a few things in this sentence:

"Poveştile care circulă în jurul lor se pot transforma oricând î scenarii de filme."

1) Why do we use se putea instead of just putea in here, and how is it different otherwise?
2) What is the purpose of "î" in "î scenarii"?

Thank you all!
 
  • farscape

    mod-errare humanum est
    Romanian
    Hi chatkigazouille,

    Let's take care of the typo first: 'î scenarii' is in fact 'în scenarii'

    Second, we'll simplify things a bit:

    "Poveștile se pot transforma în scenarii" which means "the stories/tales could turn into screenplays"

    This construction is the reflexive voice which is obtained by using the reflexive pronoun "se", in this case to describe a possibility of the tales changing (or be changed, depending on the rest of the context), into screenplays.
     

    chatkigazouille

    Senior Member
    Indonesian
    Hi chatkigazouille,
    This construction is the reflexive voice which is obtained by using the reflexive pronoun "se", in this case to describe a possibility of the tales changing (or be changed, depending on the rest of the context), into screenplays.

    How would the meaning of the sentence be different (or not at all?) if we did not use the reflexive voice, i.e. "Poveștile pot transforma în scenarii"?

    Thank you!
     

    farscape

    mod-errare humanum est
    Romanian
    When the object of the action is the tales themselves you need the reflexive pronoun.

    In your version, "poveștile pot transforma" the only meaning you can get is an action performed by the tales on something else: "poveștile pot transforma realitatea" -> the tales can change the reality.

    In contrast, "poveștile se pot transforma în realitate" translates as "the tales (themselves) could turn into reality".
     

    chatkigazouille

    Senior Member
    Indonesian
    In contrast, "poveștile se pot transforma în realitate" translates as "the tales (themselves) could turn into reality".

    Gotcha! Thanks. I learn something new today. This is really interesting.

    So in Romanian, when we want to make a reflexive situation with "putea", we make putea reflexive, instead of the infinitive, correct?

    I'm curious because in French, we'd say "Ils peuvent se transformer..." (They can transform themselves) - the infinitive is the reflexive ("se transformer"), and not "pouvoir" (putea in this case).

    Thank you!
     

    farscape

    mod-errare humanum est
    Romanian
    A putea is no more special than other verbs :)

    Let's consider these examples:

    Poveștile se transformă - defines a certainty, the tales themselves, given the pronoun se, are turning into something.

    Poveștile se pot transforma - defines the possibility for the tales to be turned into something. ( a se putea - the reflexive form of "a putea" defines a possibility, somewhat close to the French form you're quoting)

    Please note the changes of the main verb in the predicate, a transforma.
     

    chatkigazouille

    Senior Member
    Indonesian
    What I was trying to say was that, the structure is

    1) a se putea + transforma [infinitive]
    Se pot transforma în scenarii...

    and not

    2) a putea + se transforma [infinitive]
    Pot se transforma în scenarii...

    :) I'm guessing that 2) is wrong, correct me if not.
     
    Top