본문으로
댓글 쓰기

Missing forms: "-es" mood and the conditional participle?

글쓴이: GreenZubat, 2014년 1월 17일

글: 10

언어: English

GreenZubat (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오전 7:24:43

Hey, so, whilst I was learning the many forms of Esperanto verbs I noticed two things that I found very odd:

1.) When "-s" is tacked on, every vowel has a corresponding verb form except "e". For example:
  • a --> -as = present tense
  • i --> -is = past (preterite) tense
  • o --> -os = future tense
  • u --> -us = conditional mood
  • e --> -es = ... nothing?
I find this very counter-intuitive for a language that is so regular otherwise, and I feel like it must mean something, and perhaps I've just overlooked it (instinctively, I would say an extra mood, since all the tenses are filled).

2.) Similarly, when I was reading about verbal participles, I wondered what it would mean if you used "-unt/-ut" as a conditional participle (similar to the present, past and future participles), and by extension of the above, "-ent/et" e.g. mi estas kaptunta, or mi estis videta. I feel like it could make sense, so I see no reason for the asymmetry--thoughts?

donar (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오전 8:56:46

GreenZubat:Hey, so, whilst I was learning the many forms of Esperanto verbs I noticed two things that I found very odd:

1.) When "-s" is tacked on, every vowel has a corresponding verb form except "e". For example:
  • a --> -as = present tense
  • i --> -is = past (preterite) tense
  • o --> -os = future tense
  • u --> -us = conditional mood
  • e --> -es = ... nothing?
I find this very counter-intuitive for a language that is so regular otherwise, and I feel like it must mean something, and perhaps I've just overlooked it (instinctively, I would say an extra mood, since all the tenses are filled).
I don't understand your table. those forms are not mutual dependent.
-a adjective / -as verb in present form
-i verb infinitive / -is verb in past tense
-o noun / -os verb in future tense
-u verb in imperative / -us verb in conditionnal form
-e adjective as adverb / -es should describe what?
2.) Similarly, when I was reading about verbal participles, I wondered what it would mean if you used "-unt/-ut" as a conditional participle (similar to the present, past and future participles), and by extension of the above, "-ent/et" e.g. mi estas kaptunta, or mi estis videta. I feel like it could make sense, so I see no reason for the asymmetry--thoughts?
please give an example of how to use unt/ut.
What about ent/et? -e marks an adverb, passive forms make only sence to verbs, not to adverbs, not to adjectives. "beautiful" is neither active nor passive, but it's descriptive

Kirilo81 (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오전 9:22:19

As Donar said, you're looking for symmetries where there need not to be any.

BTW: Zamenhof had an imperfect in -es in Proto-Esperanto, but didn't take it over to the final language. For good reasons, noone ever felt the need for it.

willem44 (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오전 9:51:03

I suspect that since "et" is a diminutive suffix and "eg" is contrariwise a multiplicative (enlarging) suffix it was decided not to use other suffixes with -e-. It is exactly for the same reason that it was chosen to use the greek word "kaj" for "and" instead of the Latin conjunction "et". Looks plausible, I think.

Upd: There is also another suffix "-end-" which means obligation, and there are others, which I forgot to mention: -ebl-, -em-, -er-, -ec-.

sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오전 11:09:01

If you are looking for 'symmetries' you could argue that -is is beforehand, -os is afterwards and -as is anything that is not beforehand or afterwards, which covers all the possibilities from a temporal point of view.

If -es were going to be temporal then it would have to be subdivision of one of the above and would then stand out as odd, perhaps.

If -es were going to be modal or related to an attitudinal stance what would you suggest for it?

By the way, the labelling of -as, -is and -os as present past and future doesn't quite reflect the actual usage.

The time can be relative rather than absolute. Vi diris ke li venos antaŭ mia foriro. It is correct to use -os but reference is to the past (vi jam foriris).

And -as is commonly used when it does not refer to what is happening now. Tiuj, kiuj fumas, mortas pli junaj. And ĉu vi fumas? might be a question as to whether you are a fumanto, or if I am on the telephone and can't see you, could be a question about what you are doing.

Finally, -us might be better labelled as conjectural (or not-indicative in the grammatical sense) rather than conditional, since many uses of -us do not involve conditions - ĉu vi ŝatus kafon?, ĉu vi povus min helpi?, kiu protestus kontraŭ tio?

willem44 (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오후 12:52:55

And I think there is another reason not to use the ending "-es", which has come to me now. Esperanto uses the word "ses" for "six", thus numerals like dekses, dudekses (16,26), etc, could be wrongly taken for verbs, if that verb-ending was in use.

kaŝperanto (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오후 3:04:39

GreenZubat:
2.) Similarly, when I was reading about verbal participles, I wondered what it would mean if you used "-unt/-ut" as a conditional participle (similar to the present, past and future participles), and by extension of the above, "-ent/et" e.g. mi estas kaptunta, or mi estis videta. I feel like it could make sense, so I see no reason for the asymmetry--thoughts?
Check out this section in Wikipedia's Esperanto Grammar page. Conditional participles are already unofficially in use. I think the best example they have is a lumberjack cutting down trees. If he finds the tree to be spiked, he is then "hakunta" and the tree "hakuta". Very roughly, the lumberjack is "in a state where he would have chopped" and the tree is "in a state where it would have been cut down". But there is no tense associated with this, so he very likely could be talking about the tree up on a mountain, which he would chop if he could reach it.

Another subject that might interest you is the compound tense, also in the Wikipedia article.

About '-es', I think enough issues have already been pointed out to show why it doesn't exist. Another reason that hasn't been mentioned is that '-es' is the possessive in the table words:
"Kies domon vi farbis?" => "Who's house did you paint?"

Although this would be distinguishable from a verbal ending, it wouldn't be pretty.

sudanglo (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오후 8:17:12

Maybe some day some wag will suggests that a Prezidento prezides, a studento studes and a regento reges.

Re: the Wikipedia link above. Kiplings The Man who would be King is la viro kiu deziris esti reĝo

robbkvasnak (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 17일 오후 9:28:56

Awww, Maaann! Dang! I just ducked. A wild schwa almost hit me - uff! Wake up! Just another bad ĉiama komencanto nite mare. Thank Zammie that there are only five vowels in Esperanto. Juss' imagine that the nuts who "created" English would have stopped it full of long and short vowels - we'd have verb forms Medusa'ing outa our ears! What luck that the Zammie didn't rely on his Slavic verb forms for us - like Czech: jit, chodit (both mean "to go" but one is continuous and the other "simple" as English speakers would categorize 'em). While we're at it, why don't we change English around a bit. How about: I wasing for I was being. A lot simpler, no? Like, I wasing tired, wandering around the supermarket - or better yet: I wasing tired wandereding around the supermarket. Hey! If we can suggest wild changes to Esperanto, why not English? I personally wouldn't care. I was sorta corraled into it without anyone asking and don't feel too much for this language from a small, wet island somewhere off the coast of France.

makis (프로필 보기) 2014년 1월 18일 오전 4:09:04

One of these days, my prayers to the Big Zamenhof in the Sky to shine down his rays of wisdom on all the old Esperantistoj to remind them of his goal of fostering peace, will come true. Especially to remind them that attacking komencantoj who ask innocuous questions probably isn't the way to go.

다시 위로