Francisko1:HOW CAN YOU SAY THE PHRASE "MI DIRAS AL CI KE MI VIDIS VIN HIERAŬ" WITHOUT THE PRONOUN "CI"? I CAN'T DO IT. THANK YOU.

GETULS FRANCISKO

Frankouche:I like using "ci" which makes nervous especially english natives

Sorry Sorry

You could go the route PMEG reccomends if you absolutely must make the distinction: Mi diras al vi amiko ke mi vidis vin ĉiujn hieraŭ.

PMEG's solution has the advantage of using "vi" and just clarifying it, instead of bringing an obscure pronoun into the mix.

Erinja.

I’m well aware of the properties of the “tu” pronoun, my profile is clear on that. The thing with, say, French or Spanish, or even Romanian, when spoken natively is that they all have a form of neutral conjugation which reflects the use of Esperanto “vi”. Growing up in Montreal, using the above languages natively, it’s easy for me to catch that nuance. In French, Spanish or Romanian, in various spoken forms particularly, we’re easily capable of addressing someone without the use of what our grammars refer to as the "second person singular", or the "second person plural", making these elements unnecessary for us to "fully" express ourselves. Hence why understanding the Esperanto use of “vi” for us “Latin” people isn’t as esoteric as some who look at our languages from the “outside” seem to perceive. The book doesn’t say that “ci” is used every day. In fact, there is a special note at the bottom of the page, particularly stressing the common use of “vi” as opposed to the rarity of "ci". Furthermore, being that the revision of L'Esperanto Sans Peine was signed by Gaston Waringhien (as was the Esperanto Dictionary by J.C.Wells) and praised by Claude Piron, I doubt the author's intention was anything close to "whimsical" in nature. Besides, the Assimil line(especially in its French 1st and 2nd series) is known for its focus on language subtleties and avoiding oversimplification.

Somehow, I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around the level of snobbism it requires to condescend someone as being “just” a beginner and on the idea of “pittying” someone based on his or her lack of experience with a language. There’s nothing pitiful in being a beginner at anything, neither is it a sin.

In my ten-year experience of tutoring enthusiastic French and Spanish students, a more constructive and productive attitude has been to encourage them to experiment with the forms of a language in its spoken and written forms all the while guiding them through its subtleties, explaining and, above all, illustrating the reasons of particular usages, and so on. In my record, addressing students condescendingly has only resulted in negative outcomes. I find it’s a rather retrograde (no to mention, archaic), Old-World form of teaching, and I am firmly against it. Experience is the name we give to our mistakes, and if experience is a source of pride, mistakes shouldn't be a source of shame.

This having been said, what I WOULD greatly appreciate from an experienced esperantist is some useful references to authors, passages, or poems which make the use of "ci", to illustrate the archaic and poetic contexts of its use.

I do not pity beginners, and I am far from the archaic, ruler-wielding instructor that you make me out to be. I have been helpful and supportive with every student I've had at lernu - and they are numerous, since I was the sole active English tutor on this site for several years. I think if you knew me better, you would not be making these implications about my teaching methods.

But if I get the impression that they have been taught something wrong, then yes, I feel sorry for them. I regret that they were using a book that taught them wrong, or a teacher who didn't know any better, and that this person is spending a lot of their precious time and effort on studying faulty information.

It's no shame to make a mistake in a new language. But I know that if I were to find out that I was saying something wrong not out of a simple mistake, but because my book or teacher was teaching me wrong, I'd be embarrassed and I'd be annoyed at my book or teacher as well.

It's like being caught with your pants zipper down. Embarrassing, even though it's not your fault. And when someone's zipper is down, you take them aside quietly and explain the problem. And that's how I'd feel if I ran into a beginner who kept using "ci", as if they thought it was a normal way to speak.

Guiding a student through subtleties of the language means teaching the language as it is, not as you wish it to be. And I think Assimil has made an error with how they teach "ci". I encourage linguistic experimentation, but within the bounds of what is considered correct grammar. Esperanto is an incredibly flexible language that allows you to do all sorts of interesting things, but you need to master the foundation first. Correct use of "ci" is part of that foundation.

Ci is seldom used, even in poetry. This is a translation of what PMEG says about ci (I do understand that other authors may differ):

PMEG:Ci is a singular pronoun for addressing people, which does not show gender at all. Ci and cia exist only in theory, and are almost never used in practice. You may imagine ci as a pure singular version of vi, or as an intimately familiar (singular) vi, or even as an insulting (singular) vi. But it is in fact impossible to say what kind of nuance it shows, because it is hardly used:

Ci skribas (instead of “ci” one ordinarily uses “vi”).FE.16 This is the only sentence with ci in the entire Fundamenta Ekzercaro. In addition, ci and cia are mentioned in the Universala Vortaro of the Fundamento, but in the Fundamenta Gramatiko ("the 16 rules") neither ci nor cia is present. They are also not present in the Unua Libro.

Some people imagine that ci was previously used in Esperanto, and that this usage later disappeared, but in fact, ci was never really used in practice. It only appears from time to time in experimental language and so forth. In normal Esperanto we always use vi, and only vi.

Sometimes ci is found in translations, where the original has a pronoun similar to ci. That is usually an unsuitable way of translating, because ci is hardly capable of reflecting the meaning of a frequently-used normal word, when it itself is an extremely rare word, almost devoid of meaning. To show, for example, a nuance of familiarity or a sense of insult, other tools of the language should be used, as the need arises:

“Jes, jes!” diris la reĝo, “lunde ci ricevos nian filinon!” ĉar nun, kiel al estonta bofilo, li parolis al li “ci”.FA1.130 In the original text, there was a pronoun similar to ci, which shows an intimate, familiar relationship. You could alternately translate it this way: “Jes, jes!” diris la reĝo, “lunde, kara filo, vi ricevos nian filinon!”, ĉar nun, kiel estontan bofilon, li nomis lin “filo”.

Many Esperantists do not understand the pronoun ci. That's why those who try to use ci in conversation encounter many difficulties. In normal Esperanto, we simply always use vi, whether speaking to one person, or to many, whether speaking to a person we know intimately, or to a stranger, whether we are talking to a friend or to an enemy. That functions very well. As the need arises, we can specify relationships by saying vi sinjoro, vi amiko, vi kara, vi ĉiuj, vi amikoj, vi karaj, vi ambaŭ, etc.

The compound word ci-diri (or cii) can sometimes show use of a pronoun similar to ci in speech that took place in another language: — Kial ŝi ofendiĝis? Mi ne komprenas ilian lingvon. — Mi pensas, ke li ci-diris al ŝi, kaj tion ŝi ne permesas.

Uvi:Somehow, I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around the level of snobbism it requires to condescend someone as being “just” a beginner and on the idea of “pittying” someone based on his or her lack of experience with a language. There’s nothing pitiful in being a beginner at anything, neither is it a sin.

In my ten-year experience of tutoring enthusiastic French and Spanish students, a more constructive and productive attitude has been to encourage them to experiment with the forms of a language in its spoken and written forms all the while guiding them through its subtleties, explaining and, above all, illustrating the reasons of particular usages, and so on. ....

Snobbism is spitting in the general direction of the learner and telling them to get out the snob's general breathing space. Pity doesn't mean the person is giving a megalomaniac laugh and telling the learner that they are a hundred years too early to converse in Esperanto, I think what Erinja (in her somewhat trademarked parental tone ) meant is more the feeling you get when someone tries to speak to you in your native language with mixed up word order to a really heavy accent (like when a stereotypical American tries to speak French ).

The problem being that this is somewhat not just experimenting but using a usage which really doesn't exist by everyday standards in the language. It's usable, but not recommended at all unless amongst friends who know what you're on about, or unless you want people to trip up the thought processes of your listeners . That said it shouldn't really be taught to beginners alongside "ci", IMHO thats like teaching someone animals in Spanish and then throwing in "Ursus arctos" instead of "oso pardo" (of course if they know biological classification then there's no problem ). Or it's like pronouncing "ed" in English like "ehd" instead of just a "d" sound - people will generally only understand you if you're at the 125th Early Modern English Language Convention or if you're intending to confuse peop's.

Francisko1:"MI DIRAS AL CI KE MI VIDIS VIN HIERAŬ" WITHOUT THE PRONOUN "CI"

While I don't understand the tenses or context:
"Mi diras al vi ke mi vidis vin ĉiuj hieraŭ" (I said to you that I saw you all yesterday).
In this case, you simply need to add to the context so it is clear that there were more than one "you"s yesterday. It's assumed that the first "vi" is singular because there is specifically no "cxiuj" next to it.

It's an easy nuance to get used to so it's not something to worry to much about

Erinja,

I'm an intuitive learner, which is why, as part of mastering this particular part of the foundation, I'd appreciate it if you could refer me to passages, authors or poems that use "ci" in one way or another so that I can represent to myself what its actual use is with my own linguistic references and abstractions. This is the way I learn; and I know that this isn't by the rulebook, but it is optimal for me.

I came to Canada from California as a child. In Montreal, where French was mandatory, schools of the time didn't teach French courses for allophones, so I learned by listening to people talk and by reading short novels and magazines. I learned the way people learn their native languages: I observed, I experimented, I made mistakes and I reformulated. Only later did I take on the actual grammar books and the boring exercices, but by then I already had more than the basic understanding of how the spoken language worked. Learning the written forms became a matter of knowledge transfer. I did this in a matter of 10 months, and by the end of the second year of learning intuitively, my French marks in school were far above the average, despite the overwhelming amount of native speakers in those classes. By the third year, my leisure moments included reading the dark and delicious works of Baudelaire; I was 8.

This is my approach to learning, and since you've been dabbling in Esperanto for far longer than I, I'd like to rely on your experience to refer me to interesting reading. I'd particularly like to be able to compare early Esperanto writings with recent publications. Thank you.

Oh, Erinja, I never implied that you were an archaic ruler-wielding teacher. It's like we say in Montreal: C'est à toi de voir quel chapeau te fait. I know, I know, but here we don't use "vous", lol

Uvi:I'd particularly like to be able to compare early Esperanto writings with recent publications

I've never seen ci crop up in anything recent but there are a small number of hits for it in Tekstaro which is mostly made up of oldish works and classics. Use the search string \\bcia?j?n?\\b and you'll find them. Might be what you're looking for. In any case, I think it unlikely you'll find any detectable difference between old and recent "usage". Assuming of course you have any success in finding examples, as well as figuring out the intended meaning of ci in those instances (doubtful).

I think what Erinja (in her somewhat trademarked parental tone) meant is more the feeling you get when someone tries to speak to you in your native language with mixed up word order to a really heavy accent (like when a stereotypical American tries to speak French ).

Montreal is a particularly touristic city. Being an improvised but tactful tour guide is part of what you might do in your day, especially in the summer. We usually get a lot of Chinese who come here for the architecture and the cultural festivals, and a lot of Americans who think we still hunt moose and live in igloos (I wonder who makes their travel brochures )

The Chinese will often address us in French, wrongfully, but modestly assuming that it’s the only language we speak here. Often, it’s as you said, with a mixed up word order and a heavy accent. It has been my experience that being parental with someone who stands at a linguistic disadvantage can sometimes come across as very offensive, depending on the person’s character, education level and, of course, cultural background. Therefore, my way to correct the “imperfections” in someone’s language is rather indirect. For example, if Lin Huei approached me with a map and asked “Pardon, se trouver comment les beaux arts musée?” (“excuse me, where is the fine arts museum?” in a somewhat messed up word order and with sprinkled inaccuracies here and there), I’d repeat his question in the correct manner and wait for him to confirm that this is his question. I would say “Ou se trouve le musée des beaux arts?” (Lin Huei’s question correctly asked) and then, after he would nod or say “oui”, I would answer. Usually, immediately after I repeat the sentence correctly (without overemphasizing), they notice that they’ve made a mistake and they try to repeat the question correctly by themselves. If I have time on my hands, I will usually walk them to where they want to go and learn a bit about China on the way there

Americans, on the other hand, usually prefer that we switch to English if possible, all the while commenting aloud that the whole world should speak English because it’s “easier” than that “jibberish they speak here”. Texans often make this comment, alongside their dismay at how "small" our McDonald's Big Macs are. I’d honestly like to hear that “stereotypical” American try to speak French. It would be more flattering than the experience I’ve had with them so far in English.

Uvi:The Chinese will often address us in French, wrongfully, but modestly assuming that it’s the only language we speak here. Often, it’s as you said, with a mixed up word order and a heavy accent. It has been my experience that being parental with someone who stands at a linguistic disadvantage can sometimes come across as very offensive, depending on the person’s character, education level and, of course, cultural background. ...

Ah no I didn't mean that we should be parental with people (that said your method of repeating the sentence correctly (I'm assuming done in a way to make it sound as if it wasn't that the original question was wrong but to make it sound like you just didn't hear the question well enough) the same as mine so we seem to agree on that haha ) - what I was trying to say though was that the same reaction one has when addressed incorrectly in their own language, that reaction of "Oh I get what they're trying to say but I think they need a little help (or whatnot)" is what Erinja was getting at when she said "pity".

... Americans, on the other hand, usually prefer that we switch to English if possible, all the while commenting aloud that the whole world should speak English because it’s “easier” than that “jibberish they speak here”. Texans often make this comment, alongside their dismay at how "small" our McDonald's Big Macs are. I’d honestly like to hear that “stereotypical” American try to speak French. It would be more flattering than the experience I’ve had with them so far in English.

Haha, yeah a couple of people like that in Australia too, apparently "English is the language everyone should learn because everyone already speaks it" (why should they learn it if "everyone speaks it"? ) and at the same time many who said that will then go and say that English is "the hardest language in the world" as if arguing against their first point. Gotta love the great Anglo-Saxon insular mentality

On the topic of McDonalds, I think the Australian Macca's food is generally smaller than the American counterparts as well, but probably healthier . I'm still out for trying the McTeriyaki in Japan anyway.