Mesaĝoj: 44
Lingvo: English
novatago (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-05 21:30:52
matus1940:American 21st-century slang lets us answer,…Esperanto isn't English with other words. And Esperanto should be Esperanto. Fewer words could say (mean) too much things or say nothing.
…Esperanto should be succinct: fewer words say more.
matus1940:The embarrassing "false friend" of farti:This is not arguable. Again: Esperanto it's not English. I don't mind the meaning of fart in English and you should not mind the meaning of eta in Spanish. If we are going to avoid words of Esperanto because they are “embarrassing” or problematic in some way in other languages, we can turn off the lights and forget Esperanto.
Ĝis, Novatago.
sudanglo (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 10:14:07
Kirilo81:I'm sorry, but the answer of Fenris is not correct. "Mi estas bone" is simply wrong, it can only be "mi estas bona"Really, Kirilo?
The point surely is that if the adjective conveys the wrong meaning, then you should use the adverb.
La infanoj estas supre/hejme/kune/bone, ili ne ĝenos nin.
Kirilo81 (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 13:25:00
"La infanoj estas hejme" - OK.
"La infanoj estas kune" - OK.
"*La infanoj estas bone" - not OK.
Whenever a quality is predicated to a (pro)noun, you need an adjective. kune is not an exception, because it is a kind of state (similar to the local adverbs) and doesn't answer the question "Kia estas la infanoj?".
Of course esti is not just a copula, but also a verb of existence, but please keep in mind that English (and German even more, I sometimes have problems with it myself) conflate "kiel" and "kia" in the word "how".
Breto (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 14:38:07
Kirilo81:Of course esti is not just a copula, but also a verb of existence, but please keep in mind that English (and German even more, I sometimes have problems with it myself) conflate "kiel" and "kia" in the word "how".Could you give an example in which "kia" would translate as "how" in English (or as "wie" in German)? I've always understood it as "what kind of" (which I think is something like "was für ein" in German, but my German is very rusty).
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 14:48:45
Kirilo81:nouns and pronouns are described by adjectives.Nouns and pronouns are described by adjectives if they show quality. If they show something else like location (mi estas hejme), or state (ili estas kune), there's nothing wrong with it.
The question then is does "Mi estas bone" fall into either of those "acceptable use" categories. IMO it does, as it's intended to show a state in the same way as with "kune" (one's "faring state" ). It's just evitinda Esperanto because "fartas" is the more common verb used.
Kirilo81 (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 19:13:19
Breto:So is my English, I hope I get it right; anyhow, I add a German example, too:Kirilo81:Could you give an example in which "kia" would translate as "how" in English (or as "wie" in German)? I've always understood it as "what kind of" (which I think is something like "was für ein" in German, but my German is very rusty).
1)
Kia estas la nova kantisto? - Li estas sufiĉe bona.
How is the new singer? - He is quite good. (Don't know whether this is idiomatic)
Wie ist der neue Sänger? - Er ist ganz gut.
2)
Kiel kantas la nova kantisto? - Li kantas sufiĉe bone.
How does the new singer sing? - He sings quite well.
Wie singt der neue Sänger? - Er singt ganz gut.
@tommjames
Yes, of course, I sometimes forget that with beginners I have to write very explicitly.
But "mi estas bone" is wrong in any way, not just as an answer to "Kiel vi fartas?", I must insist. Those who are willing to accept it, I ask to provide evidence for this construction from the Fumdamento, Zamenhof or other good authors.
tommjames (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-06 20:48:42
Kirilo81:But "mi estas bone" is wrong in any way, not just as an answer to "Kiel vi fartas?", I must insist. Those who are willing to accept it, I ask to provide evidence for this construction from the Fumdamento, Zamenhof or other good authors.Not being in the Fundamento does not make the construction grammatically incorrect, which as I understand it was the original assertion. I do not say that "mi estas bone" is good Esperanto, only that with analogy to "ili estas kune" it is valid in its grammatical structure. The adverbs in both these phrases are doing the same thing (showing a temporary state rather than an inherent quality), so surely if we're going to say one of them is wrong and the other is right then we need to explain why that is the case.
Kirilo81 (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-07 08:50:58
tommjames:I do not say that "mi estas bone" is good Esperanto, only that with analogy to "ili estas kune" it is valid in its grammatical structure. The adverbs in both these phrases are doing the same thing (showing a temporary state rather than an inherent quality), so surely if we're going to say one of them is wrong and the other is right then we need to explain why that is the case.But bone is not kune.
There is a kind of linguistic trap here, as adjectives and adverbs can be defined on syntactic (agreement with such and such forms) and on semantic (quality/relation vs. everything else) grounds.
And I'm convinced that in Esperanto the syntactic agreement overrides the semantic value, cf. the following sentences with roughly the same meaning:
Kion vi diris, estas bele
Via diraĵo estas bela
and the absence of forms like *bele kantanto "a person singing beautifully" (German allows "ein schön Singender").
So even if you could somehow semantically justify a qualitative adverb with esti, it is blocked by a formal rule (which has exceptions for non-qualitative adverbs like hejme, kune), and 99% of the speakers will see in "mi estas bone" nothing than a beginners error.
Fenris_kcf (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-07 10:17:26
"Kion vi diris, estas bele" is wrong in my opinion. The subject is an omitted "tio" and the attribute "bel" surely refers to it and not "est", so it must be cooked to an adjective, i.e. "bela".
Kirilo81 (Montri la profilon) 2015-julio-07 11:02:19
Fenris_kcf:"Kion vi diris, estas bele" is wrong in my opinion. The subject is an omitted "tio" and the attribute "bel" surely refers to it and not "est", so it must be cooked to an adjective, i.e. "bela".No, it's the right way to express it, cf. from the Fundamento:
a) Li tuj faris, kion mi volis for the omission of tio(n)
b) Kompreneble, ke mi lin amas for the adverbial form of the predicative to a clause.
See PMEG §33.2.1 and §33.4.3.