Meldinger: 33
Språk: English
Hyperboreus (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 2 19:33:44
tommjames (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 2 21:53:52
darkweasel:The lernu-dictionary translates "disappoint" as "elrevigi, senilziigi, desaponti". "Desaponti"? Is this a bad joke? I cannot find this word neither in Revo nor in the Tekstaro...It's in PIV 2002 and Benson, so I guess someone used it at some point. Wells marks it evitinda though.
erinja (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 02:39:50
I don't think it has gained wide currency. I use "seniluziiĝi" myself. I think that many languages do not necessarily distinguish between disappointed and disillusioned, and it's totally fine if Esperanto doesn't distinguish.
Esperanto also doesn't distinguish between "to do" and "to make", which seem obviously different to an English speaker, yet somehow we all do fine (and also the many other languages that don't distinguish between these words also do fine)
sudanglo (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 08:39:22
Anyway there are two ways to share a meal. I can you give some of what's on my plate, or I can dine with you. HB, I find the use of dividi to cover both these meanings unsatisfactory.
The Esperanto way is largely to separate out meanings which national languages may have grouped together under one heading.
The core meaning of dividi is essentially divisive. So that confronted with li dividis kun ili la danĝerojn de la vojo I begin to wonder whether group travel has reduced the danger for each participant.
erinja (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 13:10:27
I recall reading about a certain Esperanto word that conflates two Russian words. Unfortunately I don't recall the word.
As far as English is concerned, British English uses the word "garden" both for something like a flower or vegetable garden, and also for what we'd call a "yard" in American English (there was an old thread on that). Esperanto uses just one word, "ĝardeno". To a Brit, it makes sense; to an American, we're calling two totally different things by the same name.
No point getting too upset about it. If we made all of the different distinctions that various national languages make, we'd have an incredible number of words to memorise.
opalo (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 13:13:53
We share the water = Ni kunhavas la akvon
He shared his water = Li dividis sian akvon
He shared (began permitting others to use) the facilities = Li kunhavigis la oportunaĵojn
The mayor shared the committee's opinion = La urbestro kunhavis la opinion de la komitato / samopiniis la komitaton
The mayor came to share the committee's opinion = La urbestro samiĝis je la opinio de la komitato / samopiniiĝis la komitaton
Hyperboreus (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 15:11:54
Hyperboreus (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 15:28:45
EldanarLambetur (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 16:03:51
Hyperboreus:Wouldn't that be a fairer accusation if Sudanglo had not provided a clear example in which interpreting "dividi" as divide or share completely alters the meaning? (La urbestro dividis la opinion de la komitato). Instead of simply saying "share and divide mean different things in English, so they should have different words in Esperanto". This example at least suggests that "dividi" is inappropriately ambiguous in this context. And given that you're saying "divide" and "share" should be interchangeable, this suggests otherwise.
I can understand your train of thought, but I fear that this because your are English and in your native tongue you do have a difference between share and divide. As Erinja pointed out, others might feel the need to have two or three form of "ili" depending on gender.
Then again, maybe it's because I'm English
Hyperboreus:The etymology of "share" is something like "shear", but it is certainly a way from "divide" in its core meaning now. "Divide" would imply they all experience less danger. But "share" at least hints that they all share the same danger, which could be no less than the danger one person would have experienced.
The core meaning of "share" is "shear", too. And yes, if you share the dangers of a trip, you reduce the danger for each traveller.
"Divide" implies the object is split up. "Share" does not commit to this, it's the object itself that implies this, e.g. if you're talking about a cake, then given that the cake is divisible, it implies that if it were to be shared, then it would be divided.
And take the previous phrase:
"The major shared the opinion of the committee"
This can only be interpreted as the major having the same opinion as the committee, not that he split their opinions.
Hyperboreus (Å vise profilen) 2012 4 3 16:18:00