Poruke: 102
Jezik: English
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 22. listopada 2014. 09:39:26
GT gives me:
compartimos una habitación
hemos dividido la habitación
and for French:
nous partageons une chambre
nous avons divisé la salle
So that would seem to be 3 languages that recognize the distinction explicitly, but the distinction is still a real one even in languages that use the same verb.
In any case, this whole business of mother tongue intrusions is different in Esperanto.
The errors of foreigners using English as a second language are unlikely to affect the development of English. In the case of Esperanto such intrusions may or may not catch on depending on their intelligibility, conformity with the grammar and acceptance by the community.
In effect Esperanto has been and continues to be a living laboratory in which 'mother tongue intrusions', whether of vocabulary or structure, are continually tested for the international viability.
And on the question of whether sen is a negative such that two negatives must make a positive what about 'sen tute ne voli implici ke vi eraras'.
Fenris_kcf (Prikaz profila) 22. listopada 2014. 10:00:27
sudanglo:In any case, this whole business of mother tongue intrusions is different in Esperanto.Are you sure about that? It seems like it already happened: Many irregular verbs turned into regular ones. For example: Many non-native English speakers won't consider "catched" to be a mistake. That's the downside of having the role as quasi-world-language: It ceases to be the "property" of the population, it is coming from. American English is quite a good example: Nowadays it is more wideley spread than the original British one and also Indian English is spoken by a significant higher number of people.
The errors of foreigners using English as a second language are unlikely to affect the development of English.
sudanglo:what about 'sen tute ne voli implici ke vi eraras'.What is this supposed to mean? The translation to German ("ohne völlig nicht anzudeuten, dass du irrst") does not make any sense.
sudanglo (Prikaz profila) 22. listopada 2014. 11:37:02
Many non-native English speakers won't consider "catched" to be a mistakeThat may be true. But the point is that doesn't usurp caught in English (British or American).
On the other hand, Sen nenia in the sense of sen ajna even if an intrusion from Portuguese or Spanish Speakers could potentially catch on in Esperanto (sen neniel voli sugesti ke tio jam plene okazis).
Maybe sen + infinitive was at one point a transposition from French or some other language. That is now firmly established as valid Esperanto. As I said Esperanto is a living laboratory open to influences from speakers of many different languages. And in a way that English isn't, from foreigners who are using it as a second language.
Mi fajfas pri .. in the meaning of tute ne zorgas pri .. seems to be a naciismo to an English Esperantist speaker (I believe it is from German) - its meaning is not instantly transparent. However it seems to have caught on in Esperanto, and is a useful addition to the richness of the language.
Christa627 (Prikaz profila) 22. listopada 2014. 18:15:39
Fenris_kcf:Many irregular verbs turned into regular ones. For example: Many non-native English speakers won't consider "catched" to be a mistake.Oh, goody!! We could use a little more of that
! orthohawk (Prikaz profila) 23. listopada 2014. 12:05:48
Christa627:I once goed thru an entire day making every irregular verb and noun regular. You should have seed the looks I getted!Fenris_kcf:Many irregular verbs turned into regular ones. For example: Many non-native English speakers won't consider "catched" to be a mistake.Oh, goody!! We could use a little more of that
Christa627 (Prikaz profila) 23. listopada 2014. 19:58:14
orthohawk:I always want to do that; but in fact the irregular verbs be so engrained in my brain, that they slip in even when I try to keep them out! As for people giving me weird looks, I don't care about that; they do that anyway!Christa627:I once goed thru an entire day making every irregular verb and noun regular. You should have seed the looks I getted!Fenris_kcf:Many irregular verbs turned into regular ones. For example: Many non-native English speakers won't consider "catched" to be a mistake.Oh, goody!! We could use a little more of that
It is very interesting how kids handle the past tense of "to bring" as they learn to talk; at first, they say "bringed," as if it beed a regular verb. Then later on they get a little more sophisticated, and say "brang," following the example of "sing, sang" and "ring, rang" and similar. And everyone understands what they mean, so why can't* we all do it that way? But they won't, and that is the main reason I don't like English very much, and why I persisted in learning Esperanto, despite the weird looks.
*"Can" is evidently a verb that doesn't have all the tenses; what is the infinitive, and what is future tense? "To be able," and "will be able"? But then the present tense would be "is/am/are able," not "can;" and past would be "were/was able" not "could." And then "will" seems to be a form of "to do" (not to be confused with "to will" ), making "to do" the only verb with an independent future tense, and thus, though obviously irregular ("will" and "do" don't look related), difficult or impossible to regularize, because there is nothing to model it after. And the more I try to analyse it, the crazier it seems; how did such a weird language even come into being, let alone get such widespread international status?!?
Christa627 (Prikaz profila) 23. listopada 2014. 20:04:51
Fenris_kcf:I also am baffled by that sentence. I do not understand what such a sentence should mean, and if it were a Lang-8 entry, and I did know what was meant, I would correct it to something clearer.sudanglo:what about 'sen tute ne voli implici ke vi eraras'.What is this supposed to mean? The translation to German ("ohne völlig nicht anzudeuten, dass du irrst") does not make any sense.
Fenris_kcf (Prikaz profila) 24. listopada 2014. 06:28:30
Christa627:… at first, they say "bringed," as if it beed a regular verb …Here i'd have make another mistake: I thought it would be "if it was".
Or is this an attempt to regularize "to be"?
Christa627 (Prikaz profila) 24. listopada 2014. 19:28:57
Fenris_kcf:Yeah, it's just me goofing off; don't worry about it. "If it was" is the officially correct phrase. Sorry if I confused anyone.Christa627:… at first, they say "bringed," as if it beed a regular verb …Here i'd have make another mistake: I thought it would be "if it was".
Or is this an attempt to regularize "to be"?
I'm still baffled about how anyone could doubt that 'sen' is a negative. It clearly shows a lack of something; anything that I can think of that I can say with "sen" I can rephrase to a sentence using "ne":
Julio Baghy:La leganto streĉas menson,If the reader is "sen kompreno," then we can say that he/she "ne havas komprenon" or "ne komprenas." It would be the same meaning to say "Ne komprenante ĝemas." That wouldn't fit the meter very well, but it would mean the same thing. If I am "senmona" then "mi ne havas monon." It would be feasible to construct the word "nemonhava" with the same meaning, although I don't know that anyone would actually do that. The only real difference between "ne havanta" and "sen" is that the former would have and accusative after it, and the latter wouldn't. With "sen + infinitive," the situation is similar; "sen kaŝi sian miron" could just as well be "ne kaŝante sian miron." Maybe there is some difference of nuance; I don't know; but the basic idea is the same.
Sen kompreno ĝemas,
"Jen, poemo, vere brila,
Sed pri kio temas?"
We have seen that "sen nenia timo" gets interpreted differently by different people. In my mind, no fear is missing, all is there. To tommjames, we're not sure how much fear there is, but it isn't none. Yet others interpret it as without any fear. It is much better to just be clear, and not try to make two negatives make a negative in a language where it is established that two negatives make a positive.
bartlett22183 (Prikaz profila) 24. listopada 2014. 19:36:35
Christa627:??? In my dialect/idiolect of (General American) English, the correct form would be "If it were" not "If it was." This ever again points up the confusion of so many (most?) "natural" languages, their confusing inconsistency and even irrationality. Yes, Esperanto is not "perfect" (whatever that might even mean), but it is far more consistent and rational than so many natlangs.Fenris_kcf:Yeah, it's just me goofing off; don't worry about it. "If it was" is the officially correct phrase. Sorry if I confused anyone.Christa627:… at first, they say "bringed," as if it beed a regular verb …Here i'd have make another mistake: I thought it would be "if it was".
Or is this an attempt to regularize "to be"?