erinja: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.

I agree.

I don't know why this is such a big deal. Even if la urbestro dividis la opinion de la komitato, there is going to be some sort of clarification to go with the sentence. Countless English sentences are ambiguous when not in context.

Hyperboreus:
If indeed it sounded like an accusation, I do beg pardon.

No pardon needed "accusation" here is just a a word for when a person makes a judgement about a motivation (e.g. that the motivation was purely an English speaker's urges). If I was upset by the notion, I probably would have said "heinous accusation"

I was merely suggesting that the two shades of meaning might actually be worth distinguishing between, because of the prominent ambiguity pointed out in the last message. Rather than simply because us English like to distinguish (that bit of rhyming pleases me ).

But perhaps you're right, maybe that type of dividi usage just doesn't come up in conversation enough to be a problem.

acdibble:I don't know why this is such a big deal

There's no big deal, just a discussion about whether two shades of meaning really are an unnecessary distinction. I find it interesting!

Setting Esperanto to one side, for the moment, there are three European languages that have functioned as interlingvoj - Latin, French and English.

I can't speak for Latin, but French and English distinguish between disappoint and disillusion, using different words.

Also, French has partager and diviser - partager often being used in the non-divisive sense of English share.

So maybe, just maybe, it is not unreasonable the Esperanto should have two words also.

By the way, how many of Europe's languages express the distinction between share (hold in common) and divide (demarcate, split into parts) with different lexical items?

Even if, as you suggest HB, it is just a question of an English speaker's sensibilities, this does not mean the issue can be dismissed.

In the world as it is today, the distinctions made in English have some relevance to the issue of what distinctions should be made in an international language. Whilst English and Esperanto are not in competition in all domains, they are nevertheless competitors.