Поруке: 101
Језик: English
erinja (Погледати профил) 16. јануар 2012. 21.25.22
I use "de iu alia", like Chainy. Clear meaning, and grammatically correct beyond a shadow of a doubt.
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 16. јануар 2012. 21.54.30
As Chainy notes the article by Ken Miner is largely concerned with the merits of another word aliula (he is not in favour) which I personally have not come across.
However, you might well be interested by some of the things Miner says about alies.
I quote the orignal text and append a quick free translation into English - may help you in your Esperanto studies.
The Tekstaro referred to is a collection of texts (books, magazine articles, etc.) culled from different eras in Esperanto's history and from many different authors.
La 37 uzoj de ‘alies’ en la Tekstaro estas ĉiuj modernaj kaj, kiom mi scias, de respektindaj aŭtoroj: .... Kiam oni aldonas la ĉ. 11.000 trafojn de ‘alies’ en la reto, oni apenaŭ povas ignori la signifan jaman akceptadon de ‘alies’.
Aldone kaj grave, la haveblaj datenoj ŝajne ne apogas la tezon, ke uzado de ‘alies’ kondukas al ĝenerala disfalo de la korelativa tabelo. Simple dirite, oni sufiĉe ofte trovas ‘alies’ en la lingvouzado de E-istoj, sed preskaŭ neniam trovas ‘aliu’, ‘alio’, ‘aliam’ k.c. kiuj supozeble rezultus de uzado de ‘alies’
... ĝia utilo videblas en ĝia spontanea disvolviĝo en Esperanto.
The 37 uses of 'alies' in the Tekstaro are all recent and as far as I know from respected authors ... When you add the 11,000 or so hits for 'alies' on the Net, one can hardly ignore the significant degree of acceptance that this has already had.
Furthermore and importantly, the available data do not apparently support the thesis that the use of 'alies' leads to a disruption of the correlative table. Put simply, you find 'alies' being quite often used by Esperanto speakers, but almost never find 'aliu' alio, 'aliam' etc, which you might have supposed would arise from the use of 'alies'.
its usefulness is apparent from its sponataneous emergence in Esperanto.
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 16. јануар 2012. 22.25.06
so it is for sure "esperantolog/o", not "esperant/o/log/o"Agreed, Kirilo. Esperantolog/o is the correct parsing.
BUT it can hardly be considered a borrowing under rule 15. In what other languages do they speak of Esperantologists.
Therefore, it serves to make my point that Esperanto does make new root words by analogy sometimes.
However the dominant word construction mechanism is quite robust enough not to be undermined by this.
If it proves useful to makes lots of words with the pseudo-affix (rather than a handful), then Esperanto may recognize it as admissible into its root stock, thereby validating general use in word construction.
So I would say that an objective description of Esperanto has to list THREE modes of new word coining, not just the two you list.
Miland (Погледати профил) 16. јануар 2012. 22.54.46
Jorge regards alies as a "trojan horse".
Miner replies that the other expected pseudo-correlatives beginning ali- have not materialised.
Cyril Brosch questions the need for the form, attributing its use to an itch for novelty.
Marc Bavant points out that Zamenhof never used either alies or aliula.
Bertil points out that the wish for alies has its roots in the need to put more elegantly forms like tio de alia.
Valdo Banajtis, if I understand him correctly, appears to make an interesting observation, that in Lithuanian we have the equivalent of a complete set of correlatives beginning ali-, and that Zamenhof may have had an insufficient knowledge of Lithuanian.
Whether or not Banajtis is right, it appears that Zamenhof did not use alies and explicitly condemned it. In my view, its fate in the end will depend on the perceived need for its use, as perhaps with other proposed new forms like ri and iĉ.
RiotNrrd (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 01.20.35
2: Alies does not have an otherwise accepted ending marker, nor a Zamenhof-established meaning (such as the prepositions, the -aŭ adverbs, the correlatives, etc., which do get away with some oddball endings).
3: Zamenhof said it was wrong.
I'd say that makes alies not a valid word. Or, at the very least, not a complete one. Alieso perhaps, or aliesa, or somesuch. Those at least have Esperanto endings (although I'm not clear on what they might mean). But alies, without modification, has no grammatical place in a sentence, new root or not, because it has an invalid form.
And because Zamenhof said it was wrong. Honestly, that's a really strong point for the kontraŭ-alies side.
Besides, making up new correlatives is not quite the same as bringing in new roots. We should probably adopt a stronger conservative stance when considering such a fundamental change than we do with our willy-nilly adoption of roots.
If alies has been used 11,000 times, then I think it's been used incorrectly 11,000 times. Some things ain't correct no matter how many times they get said.
erinja (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 02.09.34
RiotNrrd:Some things ain't correct no matter how many times they get said.Such as the word "ain't", which is an excellent example of what I'm talking about. My parents always forbade me to use it when I was a child, though it has been around for centuries. It's been around for so long but still hasn't been accepted as proper English.
If I ever have children, I would be rather upset if they were to use it.
Miland:Zamenhof may have had an insufficient knowledge of Lithuanian.I would be surprised if Zamenhof had any knowledge of Lithuanian whatsoever. He was ethnically a Litvak (Lithuanian-origin Jew), but being a Litvak is a far different thing from being a Lithuanian. Litvaks such as Zamenhof would be unlikely to speak any Lithuanian whatsoever. They would have spoken "Litvish", the Litvak dialect of Yiddish - which Zamenhof did speak.
Wikipedia says that Zamenhof was interested in Lithuanian (in English) and in Esperanto that he "seemingly" (ŝajne) knew some Lithuanian. I don't know whether this comes from an actual reliable historical source, or whether this is a misunderstanding based on Zamenhof being a self-identified "Lithuanian" Jew.
darkweasel (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 06.05.58
sudanglo:Actually PMEG lists -olog within the inofficial suffixes.so it is for sure "esperantolog/o", not "esperant/o/log/o"Agreed, Kirilo. Esperantolog/o is the correct parsing.
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 12.08.06
(If the language has now evolved to the point where -olog can be consider a root with free combination with other roots, then one can pick on other examples to advance the argument.)
It seems clear that what starts life as a bound morpheme can then become independent and generalizable as more words appear which are formed with the same 'ending' (or psedudo prefix).
Initially the mechanism for new word coining is imitation or formation by analogy, however. In the case of alies where es has not generalized that would seem to be the case.
Sometimes the appropriate anlysis is uncertain during a transition phase,
And sometimes the same morpheme may be both bound and free. Telegrafo and tele-vid-o for example.
Nobody would argue that you can't use telegrafo because that 'karambolas' with tele-vido, or to use Kirilo's example tele-regilo.
Anybody who feels uncomfortable about alies because of the coincidence with the first part of ali-a, should consider the above examples.
Kirilo81 (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 12.59.23
sudanglo:I picked on Esperantologo because that seemed to me to be a case of a word that clearly could not have arisen by international borrowing under rule 15, and noted that geologo and ekologo are parsed by NPIV as geolog-o and ekologo-o.Why not? I'm member of a German society of interlingustics where it is natural to talk about "Esperantologen" etc.
You can't use "teleregilo", because there is no "tele-" in Esperanto, but there is no consequence for internationalisms like "telegrafo".
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 17. јануар 2012. 23.00.37
But ask any Esperantist on the spur of the moment to parse televido (or to explain the word), then I feel confident that they will refer to vidi.
By the way what is the word you use for a TV set's remote?
And who came first in the use of Esperantologo, the Esperantists or your German Society? Anyway, its hardly an obvious candidate for an international borrowing under rule 15.