Tin nhắn: 22
Nội dung: English
xdzt (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 17:57:32 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
Also, would a vizitonto be a future guest/visitor? (ie, a visitor you'll receive in the future, rather than a visitor FROM the future
) Hyperboreus (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 18:14:52 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
xdzt (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 20:18:37 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
Hyperboreus:Right, I understand all of this, so perhaps I didn't phrase my question very well.xdzt:'viziti' is 'to visit', and 'vizito' is 'a visit', so why does adding an -o to vizit/ant/ make it the visitor instead of the visiting/visitation?"vizitant'" is the present participle. Now adding an -o to it, makes it a noun: vizitanto = "a visiting person/animal/thing" = "a visitor".
Also, would a vizitonto be a future guest/visitor? (ie, a visitor you'll receive in the future, rather than a visitor FROM the future
"vizitont'" is the future participle. Now adding an -o to it, makes it a noun: vizitonto = "a going-to-visit person/animal/thing" = "a future visitor".
For instance:
"Estimataj vizitantoj, bonvolu ne malpurigi tiun ĉi lokon. La vizitontoj dankos vin!"
viziti is the verb 'to visit', and when you add an -o, you turn it into a noun, but the noun isn't a person visiting, it's the visit itself. Why then is it different with the participles?
fajrkapo (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 20:54:03 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
Hyperboreus (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 21:30:59 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
erinja (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 21:36:26 Ngày 24 tháng 6 năm 2012
xdzt:'viziti' is 'to visit', and 'vizito' is 'a visit', so why does adding an -o to vizit/ant/ make it the visitor instead of the visiting/visitation?A vizito *is* a visiting/visitation, in my opinion. How would you differentiate between "a visit" and "a visiting"?
(vizitado = visiting, the prolonged process; maybe that's what you kind of had in mind)
xdzt (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 00:43:10 Ngày 25 tháng 6 năm 2012
Hyperboreus:Now the participles per se relate always to the actor and not to the action itself, because of the simple fact that they are participles.Thanks for this! As long as they always behave this way, I'm pretty content. I was worried that sometimes it may refer to the action rather than the actor, and that I'd have no clear way to know which except by context.
Hyperboreus (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 01:16:09 Ngày 25 tháng 6 năm 2012
RiotNrrd (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 02:14:08 Ngày 25 tháng 6 năm 2012
The use of Esperanto to refer to the language itself constitutes a minor irregularity, but not a particularly troublesome one. On occasion you will find uses of esperanta referring to something pertaining to the language (e.g., esperantaj vortoj), rather than to something relating to hoping, and context will have to be your guide as to which it is.
Tempodivalse (Xem thông tin cá nhân) 03:47:58 Ngày 25 tháng 6 năm 2012
RiotNrrd:You'll note that even the -anto word "Esperanto" technically refers to a person. It's just shorthand for La Lingvo de Doktoro Esperanto (The Language of Dr. Person-Who-Hopes).Slightly off-topic, I've read somewhere that one way to circumvent this ambiguity is to capitalise E when talking about the language, and leave it lowercase when intending it as a participle. (However, that would appear to go against the general rule of not capitalising adjectives pertaining to proper names.) Does anyone do this?
The use of Esperanto to refer to the language itself constitutes a minor irregularity, but not a particularly troublesome one. On occasion you will find uses of esperanta referring to something pertaining to the language (e.g., esperantaj vortoj), rather than to something relating to hoping, and context will have to be your guide as to which it is.