Al la enhavo
Respondi

Series on Language on BBC TV

de sudanglo, 2011-septembro-26

Mesaĝoj: 59

Lingvo: English

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 01:55:17

Indeed, it is mostly only Esperanto roots that have their own dictionary entries anyway. Normally you only see combined forms if for some reason the meaning isn't immediately obvious based on the root and the affixes, and even then, it's in a sub-heading to the root.

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 10:03:18

I'm seeing a pattern regarding the distribution of meanings in Esperanto, and it doesn't bode well for its claim of relative simplicity
And what pattern would that be, Razlem?

In any case, the claim made by Esperantists is that the language is simple to acquire (relatively). Not that its use is limited to simple expression.

I think Erinja's reaction to 'nebremsebla' (glad you liked the imagery, Erinja) shows how compound words which may be less common may at the same time have an immediate intelligibility, and in principle impose no extra learning load over and above familiarization with the process of compounding.

It is difficult to see where the limits lie in the expression of shades of meaning to this process of simple combination, which is so basic to Esperanto.

razlem (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 13:58:48

sudanglo:And what pattern would that be, Razlem?
Just that the compounds are forming meanings beyond their components. Which is perfectly natural for a language to do, but eventually it'll be the English to Latin.

One of your examples, nebremsebla, means 'un-brake-able'. Obviously a person doesn't have a physical vehicle brake on them, nor do they have something akin to a mechanism to stop them. From context, I assume it means that the person's actions can't be stopped or slowed. This phrase as well as some others you gave are quite idiomatic, and I suggest against using them lest they enter mainstream usage.

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 22:24:49

I suggest against using them lest they enter mainstream usage
If this is your opinion, I suggest you go for a language other than Esperanto! Metaphors add color to the language, and many Esperanto words have both a literal and a metaphorical meaning. I think that people would understand "nebremsebla" with perfect ease. The metaphorical meaning is definition number two in most dictionaries.

It would be so grey and serious if Esperanto words were always literal and never metaphorical.

razlem (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 22:39:23

I agree completely- metaphors give color and life to language. I'm just saying it'll be more difficult to learn as Esperanto's evolution continues and more expressions are created.

erinja (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-28 22:43:27

The fact that people learn it as a second language tends to decrease the number of non-logical usages that get perpetuated. The vast majority of metaphorical meanings are obvious based on the root meaning of the word.

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2011-septembro-29 10:07:14

Just that the compounds are forming meanings beyond their components. Which is perfectly natural for a language to do
Yes, Razlem, and I think you can successfully argue that this occurs in Esperanto.

But a don't think that it is a winnable argument that ever increasing inventiveness in the forming of compounds in Esperanto will eventually lead to a greater learning load, or an opacity of meaning.

Any compound which is not commonly used may enter the language, but only if it is intelligible to the majority of users.

You have to consider the environment in which Esperanto operates and there is a sort of Darwinian process operating on 'meaning fitness', and unintelligible compounds do not survive (or they may be rejected later, after initial acceptance, on the grounds of vagueness or confusability of meaning).

Metaphorical usage is a human universal, so metaphorical extension of meaning is not something alien to Esperanto speakers.

You cannot look at the natural languages and conclude that phenomena observable in the language development of those languages MUST be repeated in Esperanto.

This is the linguist's error. It takes no account of the difference of tradition and construction that applies to Esperanto.

razlem (Montri la profilon) 2011-oktobro-01 15:02:39

sudanglo:You have to consider the environment in which Esperanto operates and there is a sort of Darwinian process operating on 'meaning fitness', and unintelligible compounds do not survive (or they may be rejected later, after initial acceptance, on the grounds of vagueness or confusability of meaning).
Ah, ok. I wasn't aware there was a process of discontinuing the metaphors. By whom is this process controlled (Akademio?, la gente?)

sudanglo:You cannot look at the natural languages and conclude that phenomena observable in the language development of those languages MUST be repeated in Esperanto.
Not that it must be, but that it can be, without the speakers realizing it.

Sorry for the late response, all these languages have been keeping me busy lately rido.gif

RiotNrrd (Montri la profilon) 2011-oktobro-01 17:21:14

razlem:By whom is this process controlled
I would expect it's purely a matter of general usage.

I've seen people try and use the word "'stas" (for "estas"), I've seen people try to drum up support for "na", I've seen people try and use "ci" in ordinary conversation, there's "slu", "ri", "ŝli", etc. The general body of Esperanto speakers simply don't follow along, and these sorts of things remain fringe.

"Mojosa", on the other hand - another recent construction - seems to be on its way to general usage, because it appears to fill a niche that was actually lacking. No academy voted on it - no vote was necessary. People heard it, liked it, and now use it (personally, I don't care for it, but whatever - on their own, my opinions don't count for much).

That's how it works. And it works because Esperantists are, to a very large extent, (non politically) extraordinarily conservative in their approach to the language. Sure, beginners usually come up with a whole set "improvements", but by the time they make it to the intermediate stage they understand why a conservative approach really is part of what keeps Esperanto stable, and why that stability is a good thing.

qwertz (Montri la profilon) 2011-oktobro-02 03:36:51

razlem:
By whom is this process controlled (Akademio?, la gente?)
Only needs some reading at Libera Folio. I see it this way, that the process historically was controlled by some restrictive movement members. But they lost full control about their closed circle movement: Anglaj aligatoroj agacis aktivulojn

Reen al la supro