Al la enhavo

Kion vi celas per tio?

de nw2394, 2006-novembro-28

Mesaĝoj: 64

Lingvo: English

nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 13:42:29

erinja:Wow, I leave for a day to start a new job, and the whole forum explodes in my absence! ridulo.gif
Sorry Erinja, I wasn't trying to 'stir it up'.

erinja:May I make the suggestion, building on some comments that some other people have made, that depending on your point of view, you could even say that Esperanto doesn't have conventional nouns/verbs/adjectives/adverbs like some other languages have...
Thanks Erinja. I need a new paradigm for understaing E-o grammar. Pronoun and blah de blah from other languages simply isn't doing it for me.

I will study what you say. But not today as I am too fired up. I couldn't study anything straight at the moment.

I will, however, return to your post here and the suggestions you've made...

Thank you.

Nick

nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 13:55:56

Le Hibou:
nw2394: I have a MENSA level IQ.
Nick
I used to have an irrational predudice against members of MENSA and people like them who make similar claims about their IQ.

I'd like to thank you, Nick, for changing my mind.

I now realize that my prejudice was in no way irrational.
Well, actually, I have never joined said organisation for the same reason you dislike it.

I was, in fact, responding to the claims of others who were "strutting their stuff" about I'm a this and a that.

I made the mistake of responding in kind.

I would however point out to you that you picked up on what I said and complained about that, not the assertions of status made by those who you happen to agree with.

So you have taken sides too. I can forgive you, if you can return the favour.

Nick

T0dd (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 15:00:28

nw2394:
Because I do not work on the basis on memory as such. I think algorithmically.
I can relate to that. Even a complex rule is (for me) somehow preferable to brute memorization. When it comes to vocabulary, however, memorization is necessary. Verbs mean what they mean, and so you must remember whether the Esperanto verb is transitive. Its English counterpart may not be, and probably isn't, an exact translation.
With questions, it is different. In writing I can still manage it - for the simple reason that if the interrogative, that I normally put at the front of the sentence should have been accusative, and/or pluralised, I can go back and change it.
Consider that if Zamenhof had opted for strictly invariant SVO word order, then the question "What do you see?" would have to be expressed "You see what?" Esperanto allows, but does not require you to do this. "Vi vidas kion?" You might actually find it helpful to form questions this way, putting the interrogative pronoun at the end, at least until you feel more comfortable with the whole process.
1) Is this a who/what/which question, in which case I've got to compute which of kio or kiu is appropriate because the equivalence is not 100%.
This is actually pretty interesting. In English, "who" and "what" are interrogative pronouns, and "which" is an interrogative adjective. In Esperanto, "kio" is an interrogative pronoun, but "kiu" is an interrogative adjective (I'm ignoring the use of these as relative pronouns for the moment). So when "kiu" is used interrogatively you should always think of it as bound to a noun. When that noun is unspecified, it is assumed to be a person. So in that sense "kiu" means "which person" = who.

In context, "kiu" may modify some other noun that doesn't refer to a person.

"Mi vidis kelkajn botelojn da vino."
"Kiun vi aĉetis?" That is, which one did you buy? It's clear that in this instance "kiu" is bound to bottles of wine, not people. To make it crystal clear, some might say "Kiun el ili vi aĉetis?" but it's not necessary to do so.
2) Is this interrogative one which can be pluralised and should I do that?

3) Is this interrogative one which can take the accusative?
The word "interrogative" is simply too generic. If it's an interrogative pronoun or adjective then yes, it can take the accusative ending, just like any other noun or adjective. When it comes to the plural, we have a small wrinkle.

Strictly speaking, the words "kioj" and "tioj" are "legal" Esperanto words, but they are almost never used. In PMEG it says the -o correlatives "normally" don't take the plural ending, and it's true; they don't. But as far as I can tell this is a pattern of usage and not something that is strictly required by the rules. Maybe someone else can offer a better explanation.
4) If it is one that can take the accusative, am I using it in the fashion that someone else is going to regard as a grammatical object.

5) Is the verb which I haven't decided on yet actually transitive?
There's really only one question here. Is it a subject or object? If you know what the verb *means* then you know whether it is transitive or intransitive. If you're guessing its meaning from its one-word English counterpart, then the problem is you don't actually know the precise meaning of the word you are considering using. I can't emphasize this enough. Transitivity isn't an arbitrary add-on to the meaning of a word; it's an inherent part of it's meaning. If you know that "droni" means to die by aspirating water, then you know it's intransitive. There's nothing more to memorize. If all you know is that "droni" generally corresponds to the English word "drown," then you don't know enough, because the English word is ambiguous.

nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 15:48:41

T0dd:If all you know is that "droni" generally corresponds to the English word "drown," then you don't know enough, because the English word is ambiguous.
Well, Todd, thanks for your efforts in explaining things.

I guess I'm just disappointed. The sales pitch for this language is that it is easy. And sure, you can read all sorts of material on the web, as indeed I have done. You can also download all sorts of stuff. And you do the exercises and they are easy.

But then I go to try to form a sentence and realise that, in fact, I haven't grasped it at all and, that, in fact, it is a hell of a lot of work.

I know an Austrian lady. I pull her leg about German nouns and their gender. She just says, "mumble duh" (i.e. for der, die, das = the = la), as loads of German speakers routinely get the gender wrong themselves anyway. I don't seem to have a similar get out clause with E-o.

I'm determined to master it one day, if I have to resort to doing exercises in front of a mirror for hours.

Nick

T0dd (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 18:38:25

nw2394:
I guess I'm just disappointed. The sales pitch for this language is that it is easy. And sure, you can read all sorts of material on the web, as indeed I have done. You can also download all sorts of stuff. And you do the exercises and they are easy.
That sales pitch can be overdone, no question about it. As a general thing, I believe Esperanto is *easier* to learn than any ethnic language that I know about. That doesn't mean you can expect it to be easy for all learners in all particulars. And the truth is, for *any* language, learning to use it productively is harder than acquiring a "reading knowledge."
But then I go to try to form a sentence and realise that, in fact, I haven't grasped it at all and, that, in fact, it is a hell of a lot of work.
Well, you have to keep track of some things that you don't have to keep track of in English, that's true. But the rules are, in general, clear enough. It still takes time to get to where you can apply them in real time.
I know an Austrian lady. I pull her leg about German nouns and their gender. She just says, "mumble duh" (i.e. for der, die, das = the = la), as loads of German speakers routinely get the gender wrong themselves anyway. I don't seem to have a similar get out clause with E-o.
I didn't think gender errors were common in native speakers... At any rate, what makes grammatical gender hard for us to learn is that it has no semantic payoff at all. In most cases, it's unconnected to the meaning of the word, or even contrary to it (das Maedchen). In contrast, the transitivity of Esperanto verbs is *directly* connected to their meaning. It's their meaning that *makes* them transitive or intransitive. What makes that hard for English speakers is not that it's arbitrary but that many of these words are less ambiguous than their English counterparts.

RiotNrrd (Montri la profilon) 2006-novembro-30 19:44:49

The easiness of eo is kind of like that saying "democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others." It's easy relative to the difficulty of the natural languages. In school I took German for 4 1/2 years, French for three, and I've flirted with Latin (just a quick wink, though). Learning eo, I surpassed my German skills within the first several months of truly part-time study (maybe 15 minutes to half an hour per day). That does not mean, however, that I just soaked it up with no problems. I still have trouble with the n-ending and I still have trouble with the transitivities. But I also realized that I'm GOING to make mistakes. When I do I try to learn from them, but I don't get all wound up about it. As long as you can be understood, grammatical perfection isn't that important. It's a goal to shoot for, yes, but it's not THE goal. THE goal is to be able to communicate with others and be understood.

Le Hibou (Montri la profilon) 2006-decembro-01 01:04:10

nw2394:
Le Hibou:
nw2394: I have a MENSA level IQ.
Nick
I used to have an irrational predudice against members of MENSA and people like them who make similar claims about their IQ.

I'd like to thank you, Nick, for changing my mind.

I now realize that my prejudice was in no way irrational.
Well, actually, I have never joined said organisation for the same reason you dislike it.

I was, in fact, responding to the claims of others who were "strutting their stuff" about I'm a this and a that.

I made the mistake of responding in kind.

I would however point out to you that you picked up on what I said and complained about that, not the assertions of status made by those who you happen to agree with.

So you have taken sides too. I can forgive you, if you can return the favour.

Nick
Sorry if I seem ungracious, Nick, but I don't need forgiveness for my opinions, which were formed long before this thread started.

I didn't notice anybody here "strutting their stuff", and if I take anyone's "side" in this debate, it's because their opinions happen to coincide with mine.

If someone claims that Esperanto must be really difficult, because he finds it difficult even though he has an unusually high IQ, then that simply confirms what I've suspected all along, that IQ scores don't mean jack! And that's all I meant to convey by my last post.

Now, if you really are having trouble understanding or using the -n ending (the so-called accusative), then you are not alone. Hands up anyone here who has NEVER dropped an -n when there should have been one? (looks around, sees no hands!)

But that is not to say that the -n suffix is unnecessary, arbitrary or illogical - especially when applied to question-words. If you persevere with the language, you may come to realize, that far from making the language difficult, in fact it simplifies and enhances the expressivity of the language.

Learning a new language is never easy. Esperanto is just easiER than most, if not all, others. And that's no mean feat, it's not just "a little bit easier", it's "an awful lot easier", some say 5 times easier, some say 10 times. My personal experience: learning French since age 10, now living in a French speaking country for past 7 years, that's 40 years total trying to learn French, and I'm still Not Very Good At It!. Well, maybe I'm being modest, let's say I rate 7/10. 2 years of Esperanto? Well, maybe 7/10 as well. So for me E-o has been 20 times easier than French. And I have an IQ of 100. You, with your IQ of whatever should be be able to learn Esperanto before tea-time! rideto.gif

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2006-decembro-01 03:26:35

nw2394:

But then I go to try to form a sentence and realise that, in fact, I haven't grasped it at all and, that, in fact, it is a hell of a lot of work.

I know an Austrian lady. I pull her leg about German nouns and their gender. She just says, "mumble duh" (i.e. for der, die, das = the = la), as loads of German speakers routinely get the gender wrong themselves anyway. I don't seem to have a similar get out clause with E-o.
There certainly is something to "mumble duh". Esperanto's equivalent to that is "mumble ki-uh" if you're unsure about kio vs kiu ridulo.gif

Honestly though, it will just take practice to get you use to the kiun/kion as a question thing. Perhaps it will help you to spend more time practicing writing, in correspondence or online chats, where it is easier to go back and change something you've previously typed than it is to change something you've already said. And even though you can't 'un-say' a word, duh, you're a beginner, anyone at all would forgive you if you said "Kio vi... oops Kion vi..." I feel like you're putting a lot of pressure on yourself to get everything perfect on the first try, and it's stressing you out. Relax. Breathe. Esperanto speakers, with the exception of a very few jerks, are famously forgiving or beginner errors, and helpfully encouraging no matter how much you butcher the sentence you're trying to get out.

I'm sure sometimes you start off an English sentence then realize the you aren't saying quite what you meant to say, and need to go back and revise what you've already said. Since it still happens in English (it certainly happens with me), I think it's safe to say it will always happen to you, at least on occasion, in Esperanto as well. But the more you practice, the easier it will get. I promise.

And by the way - Where is the bathroom? is "Kie estas la necesejo?" It's a pretty straightforward sentence, no kiu/kio/-n at all!

A kiu/kio hint for questions, actually, is whatever verb you will be using. You will get very used to using -n with verbs like "vidi", so it will become second nature to use -n in questions with vidi as well. Likewise with "mangxi", "doni", etc.

And a strategy for dealing with lernu!'s dictionary, which doesn't show transitivity - look up the word in the Esperanto-Esperanto version of the dictionary. Transitivity isn't listed there either, but even with a basic level of Esperanto, you should be able to scan through the definition and tell pretty quickly what the transitivity is. The extra 'bonus' is that you get the straight off Esperanto meaning, which will help you learn when to use the word correctly (such as the now famous boli = to reach a temperature of 100 C)

nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-decembro-01 09:11:37

Le Hibou:Now, if you really are having trouble understanding or using the -n ending (the so-called accusative), then you are not alone.]
My problem with -n is not that it is hard to understand. It is:

a) Interrogrative use of kiu etc is not in my mind a pronoun. E-o regards it as such and I have get used to thinking that way, but I am not accustomed to it - and it is, in fact, superfluous.

b) When that "pronoun" is put before the verb I have to make a forward reference to a verb I haven't even said/written/thought about yet. As such it is, to me, in the same sort of category of the programmers' much hated "goto" statement.

It is just yucky - that's all. It is, at least, better than German noun gender ridulo.gif I'll get used to it somehow.

Nick

nw2394 (Montri la profilon) 2006-decembro-01 09:17:09

erinja:The extra 'bonus' is that you get the straight off Esperanto meaning, which will help you learn when to use the word correctly (such as the now famous boli = to reach a temperature of 100 C)
I've noticed from word of the day that the E-o definition of a word is not always exactly what you think it is, just because English has a similar root.

Thanks again Erinja.

Nick

Reen al la supro