Estonian to Armenian: a requirement, an expectation and a plan are not the same obligation
Pidama has more than a must meaning
EKI distinguishes several modal uses of pidama. Ma pean minema expresses being obliged to go, while other examples concern a plan, something advisable or something probable. An Armenian translation must identify which of those meanings the source actually contributes. A form related to must is not sufficient evidence that an external rule exists.
For an original Estonian exchange about an expected arrival, a statement that somebody should remember an appointment can concern probability. A statement that the person must attend a compulsory meeting concerns obligation. Assigning the same target necessity construction to both would risk replacing the speaker’s expectation with a demand.
The dictionary also separates lexical pidama involving holding an event, keeping animals or considering something a certain way. A source phrase about holding a birthday celebration should not acquire an Armenian must merely because the dictionary headword is familiar from modal examples. The surrounding complement identifies a different sense.
Armenian necessity combines a marker with an inflected action
Universal Dependencies documents Armenian necessitative constructions with պիտի or պետք է and a subjunctive content verb. Its example Նա պիտի գնա տուն concerns the necessity of going home. The action verb supplies grammatical information including the participant; the source should not be reduced to a necessity word followed by an unrelated dictionary infinitive.
The same documentation illustrates գնա՛ տուն as an imperative and գնացի տուն as a past report of going home. These attested examples perform different jobs. Telling the listener to go, saying somebody must go and reporting a completed departure need not have the same participant or time reference.
For an original Estonian report that a colleague had to leave, preserve who was subject to the requirement and when it applied. A target imperative would instead issue a fresh instruction. An ordinary past statement could report departure without preserving the requirement. Neither follows automatically from recognising the source movement verb.
An item needed is different from an action required
EKI’s vaja entry explicitly covers both needing something and needing to do something. Mul on uut rahakotti vaja concerns a required wallet; another example concerns needing to travel. The first does not itself specify buying, repairing or borrowing the item. A translation should not invent one of those actions merely to use a familiar Armenian modal construction.
In an original Estonian preparation message, a person might need a document and also need to visit an office. The document is a requirement associated with the person, while visiting is an action whose actor must be identified. These are connected practical facts, but their grammatical constructions need not be identical.
Read the source for necessity, expectation, advice or intention before choosing the Armenian expression. Then distinguish an entity needed from an event required, and preserve the event’s participant and time where supplied. This prevents a broad English must gloss from obscuring Estonian sense distinctions or turning an Armenian necessity phrase into a command that the source did not issue.
Language references