Basque to Kannada: doing something for a person need not mean that person caused the problem
A beneficiary and a reason answer different questions
A Basque organiser may explain why a task is necessary or identify the person it benefits. Both relationships can be glossed with English for, but they should not be confused in Kannada. Someone receiving assistance is not automatically the person responsible for creating the need for assistance.
Laka’s postposition discussion distinguishes gatik, associated with cause or motive, from entzat, associated with a goal or beneficiary. Her examples include doing something for friends under gatik and buying a present for Amaia under entzat. The overlap in English wording makes context essential: the first ending must not be reduced to blame, and the second does not itself describe a cause.
Zydenbos’s Kannada manual includes a request containing nana gōskara, translated as doing this for me. That provides an attested beneficiary-oriented request to compare with the Basque source. It does not establish a universal replacement for every Basque phrase whose English explanation includes for.
Keep the reason for a change separate from who benefits
Imagine a Basque coordinator moving a workshop into a quieter room for a participant who needs to hear the demonstration clearly. The room change benefits the participant. A separate sentence might explain that construction noise made the original room unsuitable. These are original planning examples: the participant and the noise occupy different roles in the explanation.
If both facts occur in the source, preserve both. Do not make the participant responsible for causing the noise, or imply that the room change is a punishment. Conversely, if the source only identifies the beneficiary, avoid adding a reason from assumptions about that person. Assistance can be requested without disclosing private circumstances.
A gift instruction creates a similar distinction. Buying materials intended for a particular recipient does not establish that the recipient requested them, paid for them or caused a shortage. Keep those additional relationships explicit only when the Basque message actually supplies them. The intended recipient is one fact among several possible facts about a purchase.
Agreement to help is not proof that the job is complete
The Kannada manual’s beneficiary request occurs in a discussion of āyitu. Zydenbos explains that the word can express agreement or approval, while in another context it means that something is done or finished. The answer to a request must therefore be interpreted with that request, rather than automatically entered into a completed-task list.
For the room-change scenario, distinguish agreeing to move the equipment from confirming that it has already been moved. A coordinator deciding where to send arriving participants needs the actual completion status. A polite acceptance of responsibility can be useful without establishing that the new room is ready.
Before forwarding the Kannada arrangement, check who benefits, why the task is needed and what the reply confirms. These checks preserve the Basque distinction between motive and intended recipient while respecting the contextual meaning of the Kannada response. The result should support the same practical decision without adding blame or inventing completion.
Language references