メッセージ: 95
言語: English
mnlg (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月29日 22:45:04
RiotNrrd:It seems that the people who do not want adjectives that agree in number and case with the nouns speak languages in which the adjectives do not agree in number and case with the nouns.As you might know, Italian has agreement in number (it has dropped cases). I think it's not vital most of the times. I gave it as an example of what I think I could live without. However I stated quite clearly that I have no intention to reform the language (quite the opposite, actually. My opinion - stated many times in this forum - is that in the long run it is much better to keep the language intact, including its imperfections).
Do we want to speak EsperantoI already do. However, as I said, that doesn't mean that I do not engage in an analysis of its qualities.
RiotNrrd (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月29日 23:16:03
For example, the fact that "you" can serve as both singular and plural in English not only doesn't bother most English speakers, it isn't even perceived by most monoglot English speakers as something that even could be an issue. I didn't even run into the distinction until I took German in high school (and at the time found it to be a very odd sort of distinction to make).
Because English doesn't have the plural form, English speakers aren't typically bothered by its lack in Esperanto - in this case Esperanto meshes perfectly with English, and the combination singular/plural form of the word doesn't even register as something strange or limiting.
But English doesn't have accusative endings, and therefore they are a constant source of annoyance (at least, at first). In this case Esperanto does NOT mesh with English, and therefore it can be an issue for native English speakers. Whereas for those whose native languages also have them, it's no big deal at all.
We just need to be aware of the baggage our native languages give us, and that they don't necessarily carry over to Esperanto very well.
mnlg (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月29日 23:36:29
RiotNrrd:Sorry, mnlg - that might have come across as a criticism of what you wrote. It wasn't meant that way.That's ok. I will try to sum up the issue. I tried to be clear, but there's nothing wrong in making things clearer
At times I feel I could be more elegant and more precise if I had a way to distinguish plurality when addressing someone. This comes more often when I am writing or translating. Of course I can do it anyway, but I see it as a matter of elegance and precision. Esperanto, in most cases, allows for more accuracy than you might usually need (compound verb tenses are a good example) so it's not really about introducing "foreign" qualities to the language.
Parallel to this there's the question of formality. Again, if you really want to sound formal, you will surely find a way. However there are those who think that a better solution is possible; in particular, those accustomed to the so-called T-V distinction could mention that it could be useful, or better said, it could be more elegant and precise than the current state of things, when you need to be formal or solemn.
I do not see it as a cry for reform, more like a search for a consensus; if there were such a feature, would it enrich the language or cripple it? I side with those who say that it would be a nice thing to have. Imagine it, if you will, as a pronoun or a suffix, meaning "I'm being formal here". Just like (and I'm merely giving an example) -ec- might mean, in a broad sense, "I'm being astract.". I'm pretty sure Esperanto would retain its capacity of expression even if it didn't have the -ec- suffix. But you will surely agree that it's nice to have it.
Frankouche (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 0:37:29
RiotNrrd:Do we want to speak Esperanto, or do we want to speak Esperantized versions of our native tongues?When i read about t-v languages in this page, i count 77 languages. Only 2 of them have no distinctions between singular and plural 2nd person pronouns : english and esperanto.
Is it not a esperantized version of english?
When i hear the difficulty of english locutors to use t-v pronouns in t-v languages, i wonder if Z did not gave a gift to them.
Like you all, i leave a lot of my native language when i speak Eo. However, some caracteristics are so specific that it "soaks" my mind very hard. It's difficult to leave my "ci", i would have the impression to use a regressive language.
RiotNrrd (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 0:58:33
Frankouche:Is it not a esperantized version of english?Zamenhof took elements of lots of different languages, including English. In general he seems to have preferred those forms which are simpler over those which are more complex. One form of "you" is simpler than two forms of "you", and English shows that the simpler form works just fine.
That doesn't mean it couldn't be simplified even further, as Erinja mentions concerning Chinese pronouns. But it wasn't, for whatever reason. Zamenhof was trying to strike a balance between simplicity and expression, not create the most streamlined language possible.
There are other elements of Esperanto which are clearly NOT taken from English. For example, I greatly miss the possessive. I would MUCH rather say "Jims book" (an English form) than "the book of Jim" (which is not). The Esperanto way strikes me as much clunkier (four words instead of two). But so what? I can make do with the Esperanto form. Zamenhof obviously felt that the possessive, as implemented in English, was more complex than was necessary, and left it out.
Yes, Esperanto has elements of English in it. But it also has elements of lots of other languages, and some of those elements are quite foreign to native English speakers. It is what it is.
sergejm (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 5:59:09
RiotNrrd:For example, I greatly miss the possessive. I would MUCH rather say "Jims book" (an English form) than "the book of Jim" (which is not).You can say "Jim'a libro", but you can't translate "Peter's book" as "Petra libro", because Petra is woman's name.
Sombody use "-es" ending, but this isn't pure Esperanto.
I think, there is no singular "you" in Esperanto, because Z didn't think about form "ci", but "ti" isn't good: in this case "your" is "tia" and you need to find other letter for correlatives.
erinja (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 14:09:38
Frankouche:It's a page *about* the distinction, of course it will focus only on languages with the distinction rather than giving a long list of those without! There are around 6700 languages in the world. Even if you say that most of them are too small to bother discussing in that T-V language page (whether those languages make the distinction or not), it still means that there is potentially a huge number of languages with no T-V distinction. I didn't see a single African language on the list, for example. I'm sure there are some African languages with the distinction and some without, but in any case, it would be misleading to say that because 77 languages have the distinction and two don't, therefore almost every language in the world makes the distinction.
When i read about t-v languages in this page, i count 77 languages. Only 2 of them have no distinctions between singular and plural 2nd person pronouns : english and esperanto.
erinja (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 14:11:40
sergejm:You can't say "Jim-a libro", unless you mean something like "a Jim-type book" or "a book of the Jim sort". It definitely would not mean "Jim's book".
You can say "Jim'a libro", but you can't translate "Peter's book" as "Petra libro", because Petra is woman's name.
Filu (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 14:12:55
sergejm:You can say "Jim'a libro", but you can't translate "Peter's book" as "Petra libro", because Petra is woman's name.It is perfectly correct to use "Petra libro" or "Petera libro" and there never was any hard rule from Zamenhoff (Zamenofa regulo) to enforce endings in -a for woman's names. In fact, he used -o endings for girl's names in the "Fundamenta Krestomatio"...
Sombody use "-es" ending, but this isn't pure Esperanto.
But as Erinja just mentioned, it would mean a book written or presented by Peter...
Miland (プロフィールを表示) 2008年1月30日 15:32:34