Poruke: 79
Jezik: English
Miland (Prikaz profila) 19. prosinca 2011. 11:50:31
sudanglo:As I have said before, I have a problem with applying to Esperanto, standards (like the KER criteria)..Have you passed the KER examinations?
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 19. prosinca 2011. 12:15:01
No, Miland, I wouldn't submit myself on principle, apart from the question of the fee and the inconvenience.
I'll leave that to those who think Esperanto is just like another national language.
In a moment of idleness I did do the C1 exam here. But I had issues with some of the questions. Don't ask me which ones it was a long time ago.
ceigered (Prikaz profila) 20. prosinca 2011. 16:20:22
qwertz (Prikaz profila) 20. prosinca 2011. 20:18:42
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 21. prosinca 2011. 13:34:39
I'd have no difficulties of principle with exams that test mastery of the basics.
But at the top level you run into a problem of authority over the language, in a way which would not present itself in the case of a national language, where native speaker usage is the ultimate reference.
For example (taken from Auld's translation of Hound of the Baskervilles)
Holmso sidante prezentis al mi sian dorson, kaj mi neniel signis al li mian okupiĝon.
How do you deal with the student who argues that that would be better expressed as 'Holms sidanta, prezentis ..' on the grounds that the seatedness describes Sherlock Holms and not the action. Or indeed that 'signi' is a little odd in this context.
Or how would you deal with student who argues that 'Supervendejo' is properly the word for a Supermarket, rather than 'Superbazaro' which more properly describes a shopping mall.
At the most advanced levels there is a certain fluidity about Esperanto which in the national languages has been long since crystallized by usage.
By the way, I am not saying that this fluidity or indeterminateness is a bad thing.
Miland (Prikaz profila) 21. prosinca 2011. 15:33:35
sudanglo:(taken from Auld's translation of Hound of the Baskervilles)The original English is "Holmes was sitting with his back to me, and I had given him no sign of my occupation".
Holmso sidante prezentis al mi sian dorson, kaj mi neniel signis al li mian okupiĝon.
sudanglo:How do you deal with the student who argues that that would be better expressed as 'Holms sidanta, prezentis ..'Acknowledging the possibility, I might say that I would put it Holms sidis kun la dorso antaŭ mi (or perhaps kun la vizaĝo for de mi)..
sudanglo:Or indeed that 'signi' is a little odd in this context.I might suggest indiki as an alternative.
sudanglo:how would you deal with student who argues that 'Supervendejo' is properly the word for a Supermarket, rather than 'Superbazaro' which more properly describes a shopping mall.I would agree, but say that superbazaro was well-established in usage by now.
sudanglo:I am not saying that this fluidity or indeterminateness is a bad thing.How broad-minded!
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 22. prosinca 2011. 23:36:25
Though you may have found my example of a disputable grammatical point unconvincing.
The context for the Sherlock Holmes example is that Watson thinks that Holmes must have eyes in the back of his head.
I think I would have translated it as:
Holmes sidis kun la dorso turnita al mi, kaj mi neniel estis doninta signon pri kio mi okupiĝas.
That translation itself could give rise to debate among spertuloj on complex versus simple forms and absolute v. relative tenses in subclauses.
Miland (Prikaz profila) 23. prosinca 2011. 11:32:16
sudanglo:That translation itself could give rise to debate among spertuloj on complex versus simple forms and absolute v. relative tenses in subclauses.Ve, not again!
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 23. prosinca 2011. 12:30:22
It is a desirable thing that this is so, since this provides a growing point for the language and at the same time avoids the problem encountered in national languages of having to know which of a number of possibilities is actually permitted by native speaker usage.
The other side of the coin is that any assessment by exams at the advanced level has a problem in principle.
Just as I, or any other experienced Esperantist, may question the soundness of translations of a respected poet like Auld, or have my own usage questioned, so any examiner may be subject to similar scrutiny.
This is not to say that there is no consensus over best usage among spertuloj, but that there are areas where there is room for debate - which in turn may establish a new consensus.
Actually, in the case of Auld's translation of The Hound of the Baskervilles, I get the impression that his poetical disposition has led him to adopt a density of expression that is not entirely appropriate in the sort of clear prose required in re-telling a story.
Edit: I quote below the translation of the sentence in question from a French translation:
Holmes, assis, me tournait le dos et je ne lui avais en aucune façon indiqué ce qui, pour l'instant, m'occupait.
This seems a model of clarity and I can perfectly picture the situation. If some native speaker of French disagrees, I'd be interested to hear why.