K vsebini
Odgovori

Attitudes and emotional states in Esperanto

od sudanglo, 30. oktober 2012

Sporočila: 60

Jezik: English

sudanglo (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 11:34:59

Oh look, this whole issue of the meaning of unqualifed -us can be tested very easily.

Take a simple sentence like Ŝi estis tiel pala, kvazaŭ ŝi mortus and ask some Esperantists what it means.

Alternatively, take a collection of sentences from the Tekstaro which use a compound conditional verb (there are hundreds), replace the verb with the simple form and see if those sentences are considered to change in meaning.

tommjames (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 12:23:31

Nah, a single sentence presented out of all context proves nothing, much less a sentence specifically selected for its probability of being interpreted in a certain way.

Relevant: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias

If I recall correctly, the point about the removal of a participle causing a change in meaning was already debunked by Erinja in a past thread, so no need to go there.

I will just re-confirm what learners need to know: -US does not show the time of the verb. The verb's timing is carried by context, and the type of phrase it appears in. Make your own judgement about the value of being aware that -US is used with varying frequency for different tenses, but don't make the mistake of thinking it has anything whatsoever to do with what your instructional materials tell you, when they say -US shows no time.

sudanglo (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 19:25:03

a sentence specifically selected for its probability of being interpreted in a certain way
What is the most likely interpretation then, Tom, and why is it most likely?

tommjames (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 19:54:48

sudanglo:What is the most likely interpretation then, Tom, and why is it most likely?
Impossible to say without context.

EldanarLambetur (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:24:15

tommjames:
sudanglo:What is the most likely interpretation then, Tom, and why is it most likely?
Impossible to say without context.
No way is that impossible without context!

Perhaps it's impossible to be certain, as with many sentences taken out of context.

But I immediately assumed something along the lines of:

She was so pale, [it was] as if she would die

(Rather than "would have died" )

The present/future just feels like the simpler assumption. It feels more generally true, like the conditional you set up could be a general thing (something so pale can seem deathly in general). It maintains the idea of some simple conditional.

Whereas "would have died" assumes that she didn't actually die. Which feels like a stronger assumption.

I bet most people have this gut feeling when interpreting.

Is it so strange that the US-modo is tense neutral in the sense that context can shape it into past/present/future, but in the absence of enough context there is a particular way in which most people will interpret it because it feels like the smaller assumption?

There's no sense saying that a whole sentence simply cannot be interpreted when most people readily understand it.

Rugxdoma (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:34:14

sudanglo:
Take a simple sentence like Ŝi estis tiel pala, kvazaŭ ŝi mortus and ask some Esperantists what it means.
I find the sentence a bit strange, because esti indicates a state while morti indicates a change. The paleness can only refer to the state before or the state after the death. In both cases the meaning should be made more clear by using participles. My very first intuitive interpretation of the sentence was that she was dead.

Hyperboreus (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:42:06

Forigite

Hyperboreus (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:50:04

Forigite

tommjames (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:53:59

EldanarLambetur:No way is that impossible without context!
On reflection I guess "impossible" was a bad choice of words. What I meant was I wouldn't be comfortable even getting into it without knowing the context. So impossible for me.

To be honest I find the phrase a bit strange. If you meant "she was so pale, as if she had died" I would put that "Ŝi estis tiel pala, kvazaŭ ŝi mortis". If you meant "as if she was going to die" then I'd put that "kvazaŭ ŝi mortos".

Paleness seems to me more like an attribute of the already dead, rather than the about-to-die, so the past interpretation seems at least equally likely, if not more likely, to me.

EldanarLambetur (Prikaži profil) 07. november 2012 21:56:00

Hyperboreus:This quite proves that you cannot assume anything without context.
Or that neither of us have enough experience with Esperanto to come up with coherent accounts! hehe! ridego.gif

But the very nature of US-modo is imaginary, and doesn't talk about real events. So to assume the very real fact that the death happened, without any contextual cues seems a bit unfounded.

Nazaj na začetek