Поруке: 60
Језик: English
psoubourou (Погледати профил) 01. новембар 2012. 10.08.11
I first supposed that the aim of Esperanto was communication of ideas so I didn't expect getting the ease I have to swear and colloquial-umi so easily, but actually it's much easier for me than I initially thought. Maybe it's because the language gives also opportunity to de-latin-uloj feel comfortable in general.
There are lists of words for beginners like Tabuaj vortoj en Esperanto and one can read KancerKliniko which demonstrates another use of Esperanto than Monato (which I actually never read), but the secret to comfortable-igi the language for si is to not be afraid of using images and play with the words.
Lots of esperantists use the language as some kind of brainiac thing, it should be logical, non-ambiguous, kvazau-lojban-a, but that's not the point. I at least don't want to get into that and, although I'm aware of the intercultural issue of using expressions understandable in any country, I tend to prifajfi those maybe even in my country that don't "see the logic" of this or that expression.
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 01. новембар 2012. 10.53.22
Slanging match: a dispute in which insults and accusations are made by each party against the other.
Perhaps this expression is not used in American English.
On the question of divide versus share HB this distinction seems to me to be recognised in French and I suspect also in other languages than English. (I would quite happily borrow the French word partager for sharing non-divisible things - partaĝi?)
I don't mind se vi proponas dividi la koston de io kun mi. But I would begin to panic se vi sugestus ke ni dividu mian aŭton. I might think that you were proposing some sort of cut and shunt, not just suggesting that we share the car. I can also imagine the reaction of a child if he/she were told to dividi her toys. And if I share someone's anger I don't reduce the intensity of his feeling.
This is all a bit like how disillusionment was muddled up with disappointment until desaponti came along.
On the question of the temporal value of -us HB I think the facts of usage support that this normally implies present or future. Sometimes, certain grammatical notions just get regurgitated over and over again without anybody stopping to ask whether they are true. Mi certas ke vi konsentus - not, I'm sure you would have agreed.
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 01. новембар 2012. 11.01.06
but that's not the pointYes, it does depend on what you think Esperanto is for - à quoi la langue doit servir (excuse my French)
RiotNrrd (Погледати профил) 01. новембар 2012. 19.31.43
sudanglo:Perhaps this expression is not used in American English.I've never heard it before.
Since the phrase appears to describe our entire economic, political, and legal system, at practically every level, it might simply be too broadly applicable to be meaningful.
tommjames (Погледати профил) 01. новембар 2012. 22.52.20
sudanglo:Sometimes, certain grammatical notions just get regurgitated over and over again without anybody stopping to ask whether they are true.Before stopping to ask that question, it helps to actually understand the notion.
As has been clarified several times in this forum already, the reason -US is said to be time-neutral is that it may be used for any time, or when the timing is not important, or even determinable. Thus -US by itself does not have an inherent time quality in the way that -IS, -AS and -OS do. A US-verb's timing depends entirely on the type of phrase it appears in as well as the surrounding context.
Yes US-verbs tend to be used in practice for some tenses more than others, and I guess to somebody somewhere out there this fact may be interesting, or even useful to be aware of. But it has no relevance whatsoever to the purported time-neutrality of the US-ending. To pretend otherwise is simply to misunderstand or misrepresent what all the grammars are saying.
sudanglo:Mi certas ke vi konsentus - not, I'm sure you would have agreed.No, that phrase could be perfectly fine for "I'm sure you would have agreed", if the context sets us in the past clearly enough.
erinja (Погледати профил) 02. новембар 2012. 01.42.16
sudanglo:On the question of divide versus share HB this distinction seems to me to be recognised in French and I suspect also in other languages than English. (I would quite happily borrow the French word partager for sharing non-divisible things - partaĝi?)I use "kundividi" for "share", to distinguish between it and "dividi".
... I have, however, occasionally heard people say "ŝari" to refer to internet file sharing - like in Google Docs, giving someone else the right to view or edit a document. It wasn't native English speakers, either. I use "kundivido" for that meaning as well, however.
I am not completely of a 'bonlingvist' orientation but I do believe in exhausting the easy possibilities of native Esperanto rules before going 15th rule all over the place.
I recently got a message from someone who referred to her "trudmesaĝoj", rather than calling it "spamo". I had frequently used "Rubmesaĝo" myself, but I really liked the image that "trudmesaĝo" puts forth. I will perhaps start calling paper junk mail "trudpoŝto", it's really the same idea, isn't it?
If you think about these things carefully, you can come up with excellent terms that people immediately understand (even if they don't speak French).
sudanglo (Погледати профил) 02. новембар 2012. 12.04.30
If you think about these things carefully, you can come up with excellent terms that people immediately understand (even if they don't speak French).Perhaps, Erinja but it makes it difficult to have a heated argument if you have to flounder around for a clever kunmetitaĵo. In moments of high emotion one's ingenuity is inclined to desert one.
Could you do 'resent' for me. I find that neither indigni nor rankoro hit the mark. 'I really resent having to ...'; 'She fixed me with a resentful stare'.
Yes 'trudmesaĝo' is ingenious but I think presents Spam in different light. I would say that rubmesaĝo and trudmesaĝo are welcome additions but I wouldn't want to abandon Spamo. I sometime find in my Spamujo emails that literally consist of rubbish, just random characters. Junk mail could well be Spam-poŝto. But Trudpoŝto is nice.
Fascinating borrowing 'ŝari', and very interesting that you heard it from someone whose mother tongue is not English. Given the ubiquity of English in the modern world it is quite natural that there should be an increased level of borrowing from that language as in the early days of E. there was much borrowing from French which held a dominant position then on the international language stage.
I believe Zamenhof once said that if you can't think of a word, take it from French. If he were alive today it might change that to take it from English.
Kundividi still has the notion of dividi in it. How would it work for share an interest'/share a bed or car/share a common ancestor, or all those cases where dispartigo is not applicable? I haven't searched the Tekstaro for it, but I wonder if 'partumi' has ever been used where there is no actual division, but either you use something in turn, or experience (or profit from) something together with others.
Perhaps we could share - Eble ni povus partumi?
(Not in a million miles, Tom would this be normally uderstood as Eble ni povintus partumi)
antoniomoya (Погледати профил) 02. новембар 2012. 12.42.34
sudanglo:Kundividi still has the notion of dividi in it. How would it work for share an interest'/share a bed or car/share a common ancestor, or all those cases where dispartigo is not applicable? I haven't searched the Tekstaro for it, but I wonder if 'partumi' has ever been used where there is no actual division, but either you use something in turn, or experience (or profit from) something together with others.Kunhavi intereson, aŭ komunan praulon; kunuzi liton, aŭ aŭton; kundividi kukon; kunloĝi apartamenton; kunregi landon.
Perhaps we could share - Eble ni povus partumi?
Eble ni povus kunfumi?
Amike.
tommjames (Погледати профил) 02. новембар 2012. 12.56.10
sudanglo:Perhaps we could share - Eble ni povus partumi?Perhaps, but that doesn't concern the point I was making. I quite agree that simple US-verbs are used for the future more than the past. My argument is just that it doesn't have anything to do with the inherent time-neutrality of the US-ending.
(Not in a million miles, Tom would this be normally uderstood as Eble ni povintus partumi)
And I don't really see how "povus partumi" is especially inconducive to being read as "povintus partumi". I can easily imagine context making that possible, if we're discussing some past event where sharing did not take place (but we would like it to have), and where you would be most unlikely to read it as sharing in the future/present, due to such sharing being effectively impossible or undesirable due to circumstances.
Anyway I don't wish to derail the thread with this so apologies in advance if it does so!
Teapot (Погледати профил) 02. новембар 2012. 17.46.40
PMEG:US-formo estas uzata por agoj kaj statoj nerealaj, imagaj aŭ fantaziaj. US-formo ne montras la tempon de la agoSource