Zum Inhalt
Antworten

Francismo?

von sudanglo, 8. Januar 2012

Beiträge: 52

Sprache: English

tommjames (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 00:30:00

Miland:I'm glad you think so.
Yes but just because an explosion is a process (as are most events, in some way), it doesn't follow that the progressive participle is suitable.

Note that I did not say it's wrong to use it; I even suggested scenarios in which it may be the better option. But without knowing how the speaker wishes to present the action (some context would make that clear), there's no way to know if it's worth using. Usually it won't be.

Well I feel I'm repeating myself now, so I'll leave it at that.

lgg (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 00:42:04

Such constructs, lifted straight from school Latin course, are not logical and do not belong in the international language.

Kirilo81 (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 09:18:38

lgg:Such constructs, lifted straight from school Latin course, are not logical and do not belong in the international language.
That's it.
*plonk*

Chainy (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 09:31:02

Kirilo81:*plonk*
-er?

Kirilo81 (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 10:04:27

Chainy:
Kirilo81:*plonk*
-er?
some kind of fish okulumo.gif

Miland (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 10:41:15

On the subject of "Latin constructions" and education, while the "-ing" form in English and similar forms in European languages might make the construction Mi X-is Y-on Z-i easy to understand and accept as a convention, it might not be so obvious to a learner from another background, that Z-i in such a construction means by convention Z-anta. Therefore it may be better to provide learners with an explanation of this, and then go to say that the construction is commonly used and accepted. Clarity in my view is more likely to be furthered by such explanations during instruction, whereas sweeping the problem under the carpet might not be helpful. This may be especially true for Esperanto, whose learners tend to be brighter than average.

So I would like to have opinions about this from learners whose first language is Asian or African.

sudanglo (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 12:05:52

When you find yourself in a hole, Miland, wouldn't it be better to stop digging?

Point one: before developing an argument based on what might happen in non-European languages, it is advisable to do some checking.

Easy enough to ask in the Esperanto forums (where there are speakers of such languages or those who have knowledge of them) as to whether the structure in question exists, or presents any special difficiulty.

Point two: in Mi X-s Y-on Z-i, Z-i does not mean Z-anta, even if the 'Y-on' is who or what Z's. As Tom pointed out, to rephrase this with -anta introduces extra meaning.

The Z-i presents the action as a whole not part of it.

Mi aŭdis lin fermi la pordon suggests that door actually got closed. And 'Kiu lasis la hundon eskapi' is an even clearer example.

When Y-on is not the subject of Z, there is also no question of participle equivalence - Mi esperas vin vidi morgaŭ.

Bemused (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 12:07:12

Kirilo81:
lgg:Such constructs, lifted straight from school Latin course, are not logical and do not belong in the international language.
That's it.
*plonk*
A virtual mute button. Genius. Thank you very much.

Miland (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 17:59:55

In my view a present participle can cover a whole action. For this reason I affirm that this construction does treat Z-i as equivalent to Z-anta, and is in my view a naci-ismo based on similar forms in European languages.

That is why I would like to hear from people with other linguistic backgrounds.

Kirilo81 (Profil anzeigen) 11. Januar 2012 19:52:38

Miland:In my view a present participle can cover a whole action.
For logical reasons it simply cannot. When something is still happening, it can't be over at the same time. For that reason aspect languages don't have a perfective aspect for present tense.

(It is possible to refer via -anta to accomplished actions if you're talking about something repeated, but then the series of actions is not finished).

Zurück nach oben