Kwa maudhui
Kujibu

Is the "Londona Biblio" archaic?

ya byronarnold, 1 Septemba 2012

Ujumbe: 23

Lugha: English

byronarnold (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 7:24:59 alasiri

I have the text of the Londona Biblio (the Esperanto version of the Bible) on my Bible Program on my android phone. I am thinking of using it to help me learn Esperanto so that I can study on the go. My question is, is this text archaic? I know its almost a hundred years old, which is why I am asking.

Thanks for your input!

eitanulo (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 7:33:48 alasiri

Esperanto never changed from the beginning..

jchthys (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 7:35:13 alasiri

I've not read a huge amount, but I didn't notice anything especially odd. The usage is a bit different from slang colloquial Esperanto, I guess, but a good formal register. I noticed that in Esperanto, a translator can afford to be a bit more literal than in English without sounding odd.

If you're interested in an audio bible, there's quite a bit which has been by Ken Caviness and other volunteers. (I've read a few chapters and hope to do more this next academic year.)

darkweasel (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 8:04:20 alasiri

eitanulo:Esperanto never changed from the beginning..
kian vi aŭdis tion?

SCNR and sorry, pun would be lost if I translated this to English. ridulo.gif

Vestitor (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 8:20:24 alasiri

I couldn't imagine anyone using the Bible to learn any other language. Straightforward texts are better so meaning is clear.

hebda999 (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 8:24:54 alasiri

eitanulo:Esperanto never changed from the beginning..
It did a lot - vocabulary grew from 1000 roots to almost 15000, some uses have been abandoned now, and so on. Consult Don Harlow for more details.

byronarnold (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 8:46:32 alasiri

Vestitor:I couldn't imagine anyone using the Bible to learn any other language. Straightforward texts are better so meaning is clear.
I wasn't going to use a theologically rich passage such as one of Paul's epistles, for example. I was thinking more of Mark, which is mainly narrative and not much theologically rich teachings (none, in fact, that I can think of). Mark is, to my thinking, a very straight forward book. My main reason for wanting to use the Londona Biblio is convenience. I have it on my phone, along with a translator, so I practice Esperanto on the go.

richardhall (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 8:53:18 alasiri

Vestitor:I couldn't imagine anyone using the Bible to learn any other language.
Why not? If it's a text you know well in your own language, looking at how it's done in Esperanto can only be helpful.

Vestitor (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 9:20:37 alasiri

richardhall:
Vestitor:I couldn't imagine anyone using the Bible to learn any other language.
Why not? If it's a text you know well in your own language, looking at how it's done in Esperanto can only be helpful.
I can think of two reasons:

It's very likely written in a way completely different to almost every ordinary sentence one is likely to write (or say) when using any language for normal discourse.

I like discouraging people from reading the Bible whenever I can. ridulo.gif

richardhall (Wasifu wa mtumiaji) 1 Septemba 2012 10:05:48 alasiri

Vestitor:It's very likely written in a way completely different to almost every ordinary sentence one is likely to write (or say) when using any language for normal discourse.
I can't say that I've noticed that.

Kurudi juu