Could someone clarify the following phrase for me, please. A friend is taking her baby son to an eye clinic and writes: "jdeme k ocnimu lekari, na prav.ocicku mu rostou rasy smerem do oka" Thanks
Hmmm... Just curious about a finer point of Czech language. When parts of the body are mentioned in a phrase as an object (direct or indirect) without specific use of the reflexive possessive, are they automatically attributed to the person mentioned in the subject of the sentence, unless otherwise specified? E.g. Should one specify "do svého oka" in the given example, or is it implicitly specified by construct in the Czech? (i.e. is there ambiguity in Czech if one does not use "svého" in this sentence?) I seem to recall this was the case in Spanish (ex. "Él tiene dinero en la mano," instead of "en su mano.")
...na prav.ocicku mu rostou rasy smerem do oka... Here, there is no need of saying do jeho oka (not svého, as řasy is the subject of the sentence, not the baby boy), because mu expresses implicitly whose eye and lashes are mentioned.
The sentence may be ambiguous syntactically, but not functionally. The fact that the diminutive of eye (očičko) is used here makes it much more likely that she's talking about the baby and not the doctor.
"Jdeme k očnímu lékaři, na pravém očičku mu rostou řasy směrem do oka." I'm affraid that this sentence is unambiguous. mu = lékaři (as nobody else is mentioned)
