la lingvaj respondoj
od orthohawk, 9. júla 2015
Príspevky: 18
Jazyk: English
Kirilo81 (Zobraziť profil) 10. júla 2015 11:34:14
yyaann:There is also posteulo in order to avoid a collission with postulo.Kirilo81:There is an implicit rule that the categorial endings can't be combined with each other (*nuneo) nor become kernel of a new compound (*oa)I can think of an exception though: vivuo ( krio "vivu" ), which is featured in the PIV. So maybe it's possible in theory, just not used very often in practice because the need hardly ever arises?
I think from vivui, which is a calque from Polish wiwatować (< Latin vivat 'ĝi vivu' + -ować '-(um)i' ), one cannot abstract a general permission, it is rather used as a kind of quote (["vivu! vivu!"]-i).
Kirilo81 (Zobraziť profil) 10. júla 2015 11:37:05
WereVrock:I think that "blu" has a meaning even though we cannot easily use it alone. For example we have "feko" and people use "fek" as an equivalent of "sh*t".See §16 of the Fundamenta Gramatiko: blu' = bluo, but not blua.
yyaann (Zobraziť profil) 10. júla 2015 13:35:42
Kirilo81:I think from vivui, which is a calque from Polish wiwatować (< Latin vivat 'ĝi vivu' + -ować '-(um)i' ), one cannot abstract a general permission, it is rather used as a kind of quote (["vivu! vivu!"]-i).Yes, that makes sense.
Breto (Zobraziť profil) 10. júla 2015 15:23:49
WereVrock:I think that "blu" has a meaning even though we cannot easily use it alone. For example we have "feko" and people use "fek" as an equivalent of "sh*t".True, and I've used that example many times myself. Then again, there's also the preposition "far", which seems to have much less acceptance. And what determines that one would be an interjection and the other a preposition, anyway?
Kirilo81:See §16 of the Fundamenta Gramatiko: blu' = bluo, but not blua.Blu is not the same as blu', though. The apostrophe is a silent stand-in for -o, so blu' is clearly, if inaudibly, marked as a noun. Blu, however, is not.
Tempodivalse (Zobraziť profil) 11. júla 2015 11:06:04
Kirilo81 (Zobraziť profil) 15. júla 2015 8:56:47
Breto:Blu is not the same as blu', though. The apostrophe is a silent stand-in for -o, so blu' is clearly, if inaudibly, marked as a noun. Blu, however, is not.Err, but blu without elision is not word in Esperanto...
@Tempodivalse
For me it's always Fek'! with elision, but there is some tradition which allows ordinary roots to become interjections, see PMEG.
However, I'm not sure whether this is covered by the Fundamento, which e.g. gives ek' as root, not *ek etc. If the rule has been in use before the Fundamento, it should be OK, but this deserves a proper study.
Breto (Zobraziť profil) 16. júla 2015 22:28:51
Kirilo81:Presumably, it is as much a word as fek or far would be. I've no idea what function it would serve, but theoretically, if any root can be used as a stand-alone word, then every root can.Breto:Blu is not the same as blu', though. The apostrophe is a silent stand-in for -o, so blu' is clearly, if inaudibly, marked as a noun. Blu, however, is not.Err, but blu without elision is not word in Esperanto...
Tempodivalse (Zobraziť profil) 16. júla 2015 22:51:00
theoretically, if any root can be used as a stand-alone word, then every root can.This isn't quite right. There are certain expressly standalone roots - these include mainly conjunctions, prepositions and numbers. They can take a grammatical ending, which normally changes the meaning somewhat, or at least the role in the sentence (malgrau -> malgraue; jes -> jesi, etc).
However, this is a mostly closed set of words. Only rarely do you see newcomers, like ekde and the rarer far. I don't think we can conclude that any root can suddenly be used standalone, just because those are. There isn't much Fundamento support for such an attitude.
On the other hand, lots of interjections without endings have been around since Z's time: ho! ve! nu! So this gives a precedent to new ending-less interjections like ek! fek! acx!. I think we are OK as long as it is clear these interjections cannot be appropriately used in any context, except as interjections - the same way we treat ba! nu! etc.