Al la enhavo
Respondi

Using -es as a possessive marker

de SciBerC, 2014-aŭgusto-22

Mesaĝoj: 41

Lingvo: English

domestro (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 14:30:20

This thread has lost its original meaning. We are no more discussing about using -es, but about different ways of possessive marker. The breaking point was this post by korona:
If it's understood whose girlfriend we're referring to, could you say "La koramikina kato" to refer to the cat?
Already proposed ways of saying "wolf's pup":
lupes ido - rejected by me, no more mentioned
lupa ido - useful in "Londona klubo", but causes troubles in "koramikina kato" and similar
lupoa ido - proposed by me, logical according to me, but refused by erinja
Sudanglo at 2014-08-26 10:28:46 misunderstood her reaction and broke open door. Lupia or lupea are apparent nonsenses, but lupoa would be exact translation of wolf's, if suffix "-a" (as in mia) could be applied after suffix "-o".

This is change to fundamental nature of Esperanto, according to erinja. In my view, it isn't.

So the only correct way of possessive marker is ido de lupo, whether you like it or not.

Esperanto is living language, whose fundamental nature cannot be changed. But I have never seen a rule forbidding agglutination of more grammatical endings. Claude Piron would be at my side. I agree one should not invent ludio or similar tricks ("maltrinki" - to piss etc.), because this is seen as disregard to language. I like Esperanto and strive to use it correctly, but when I am not sure about grammar (less often vocabulary), I say "what I have on tongue", whether it is correct or not. It must be compatible with my understanding of the language, which can differ from erinja's one. Anyway, this is reality in any language, because who knows a language totally correctly? Even in my native Slovak I used language tricks heard from less skilled users of language, because they amused me. However, they were comprehensible to everyone.

PS: Zamenhofa teksto can be both "text by Zamenhof" and "text of Zamenhof's style". Both have their own (more precise) expression: teksto de Zamenhof and Zamenhofeca teksto. Please read the first page before more flaming!

Clarence666 (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 17:39:47

orthohawk:The forms "mies" and "sxies" (along with "vies", "lies", ilies" and "nies" ) are unnecessary, since mia, via, lia, sxia, ilia, and nia are the possessive adjectives.
This is just another flaw of the language. | Cxi tio estas alia manko de la lingvo.

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 17:51:04

Clarence666:
orthohawk:The forms "mies" and "sxies" (along with "vies", "lies", ilies" and "nies" ) are unnecessary, since mia, via, lia, sxia, ilia, and nia are the possessive adjectives.
This is just another flaw of the language. | Cxi tio estas alia manko de la lingvo.
Why is this a flaw? It is a feature.
Is the flaw that "mies" doesn't exist or that "mia" is a possessive pronoun?

((p.s. "plia" manko))

Clarence666 (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 17:55:26

"mies" instead "mia" would be more logical and more
consistent with "ties" | "mies" anstataux "mia" estus pli logike kaj kohere kun "ties"

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 17:58:30

Clarence666:"mies" instead "mia" would be more logical and more
consistent with "ties" | "mies" anstataux "mia" estus pli logike kaj kohere kun "ties"
Ekde kiam lingvoj temas pri logikeco kaj kohereco?
Miaopinie, la mallogikaĵoj kaj malkoheraĵoj plibeligas kaj pliinteresigas la lingvojn.

Clarence666 (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 18:06:59

nornen:mallogikaĵoj kaj malkoheraĵoj plibeligas kaj pliinteresigas la lingvojn.
Ho mojose! EO bezonas almenaux 1'000 neregulajn verbojn, almenaux 10 obskurajn verbformojn (subjonctif, ...), almenaux 50 obskurajn sonojn, almenaux 50 obskurajn cxapelojn, neregulajn substantivojn, adjektivojn, adverbojn kaj subjunkciojn, ...

nornen (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-29 19:27:44

Clarence666:
nornen:mallogikaĵoj kaj malkoheraĵoj plibeligas kaj pliinteresigas la lingvojn.
Ho mojose! EO bezonas almenaux 1'000 neregulajn verbojn, almenaux 10 obskurajn verbformojn (subjonctif, ...), almenaux 50 obskurajn sonojn, almenaux 50 obskurajn cxapelojn, neregulajn substantivojn, adjektivojn, adverbojn kaj subjunkciojn, ...
EO ne bezonas kion vi postulas.
Sammaniere EO ne bezonas esti 100% logika aŭ kohera.

EDIT: Sorry, I didn't realize this was an English thread.
EO doesn't need what you ask for.
Nor does it need to be 100% logical or coherent.

Christa627 (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-30 21:05:58

erinja:SciBerC, this idea of extending the use of -es is a common one for English speaking beginners. When I started with Esperanto, I could hardly believe that there was no way of adding an ending like 's. I thought, this can't possibly be the case, that we have to say "the car of John" rather than "John's car".
This is one point in which my previous study of Spanish helped me. I very clearly remember several years ago when I was starting to study Spanish, and I asked a Spanish-speaking friend how to say "Christa's notebook." His answer was "el cuaderno de Christa." And my immediate mental response was "I'm trying to say 'Christa's notebook,' not 'the notebook of Christa!' There must be some other way!" But there isn't, and I got used to that as I kept studying. So when I got started with Esperanto and found that possessives are formed with "de," it didn't seem too unnatural, although I must confess that the "'s" possessive system is one of the few things I prefer about English. (The way of negating verbs in Esperanto is also more like Spanish than English, but that is off-topic.)

Alkanadi (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-31 06:11:49

Christa627:...And my immediate mental response was "I'm trying to say 'Christa's notebook,' not 'the notebook of Christa!' There must be some other way!" But there isn't, and I got used to that as I kept studying...
I didn't know that but I am not surprised. It is similar for other languages as well.

I think that a language is simpler when there is only one way of saying something. I don't think it is a big hurtle to remember that we have to say the book of somone rather than someone's book

sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2014-aŭgusto-31 10:55:14

I don't think it is a big hurdle to remember that we have to say the book of someone rather than someone's book
In this specific case it would be 'ies libro' rather than la libro de iu. My book would be however mia libro and not mies libro.

So Esperanto does present you with only one choice in these examples.

A similar restriction can also be present in English. 'The book of the Dead' (en pra-Egiptujo) can't be rendered as 'the Dead's book'.

The 'note book of Christa' only seems to be an alternative to Christa's notebook because sometimes there is a choice in English between 's and 'of', but nobody would normally say the 'notebook of Christa'.

Yes Erinja, la Zamenhofa lingvo would be the Esperanto as used by Zamenhof. But la originala Zamenhofa teksto would be Zamenhof's original text.

Reen al la supro