Ir ao conteúdo
Responder

Quick question

de westcoastghost, 26 de julho de 2015

Mensagens: 10

Idioma: English

westcoastghost (Mostrar o perfil) 26 de julho de 2015 18:52:52

if you are saying, for example "you (pl) are beautiful" would that translate into "vi estas bela" or "- belaj"?

vikungen (Mostrar o perfil) 26 de julho de 2015 18:58:08

westcoastghost:if you are saying, for example "you (pl) are beautiful" would that translate into "vi estas bela" or "- belaj"?
Vi estas belaj.

Tempodivalse (Mostrar o perfil) 27 de julho de 2015 03:08:01

The second person plural pronoun will always use the plural for adjectives and nouns describing the pronoun.

--> Vi ne plu estas geknaboj. Alvenis la tempo por igxi plenkreskuloj!

This is often helpful, because vi by default can refer to either singular or plural.

sudanglo (Mostrar o perfil) 30 de julho de 2015 10:43:53

Normally it would be the case that you would pluralize the adjective for a plural subject. So vi estas bela refers to a single person whilst vi estas belaj refers to more than one person)

But perhaps in cases where you have used a plural pronoun but conceive of it as designating a single entity you might break that rule.

Referring to the Esperantists - Ni (la Esperantistaro) estas socie homogena. Each individual Esperantist isn't socially homogeneous - it's a quality of the group. In this case maybe Ni (la Esperantistaro) estas socie homogenaj might be a little strange (just a thought).

Tempodivalse (Mostrar o perfil) 30 de julho de 2015 19:16:13

sudanglo:But perhaps in cases where you have used a plural pronoun but conceive of it as designating a single entity you might break that rule.

Referring to the Esperantists - Ni (la Esperantistaro) estas socie homogena. Each individual Esperantist isn't socially homogeneous - it's a quality of the group. In this case maybe Ni (la Esperantistaro) estas socie homogenaj might be a little strange (just a thought).
Is there any precedent for this in the Tekstaro? It looks just wrong to have the singular adjective directly modify the plural pronoun, even in your example - sounds like the royal we! Or perhaps my Slavic intuitions are causing that reaction.

Of course in situations like Ni estas stranga grupo there is no problem, but there the adjective is not actually modifying the pronoun.

tommjames (Mostrar o perfil) 31 de julho de 2015 08:49:36

Tempodivalse:Is there any precedent for this in the Tekstaro?
I didn't manage to find any, but there does seem to be precedent for a certain "laxity" in number concord, as we saw in a recent thread. Whether that extends to this particular form I'm not sure but I can agree with sudanglo that the use of the singular adjective seems to make somewhat better sense here, since homogenity is a property of the group, not so much the individuals within it.

The difference between this example and the one from that thread would be that in the thread the "senca rilataĵo" (da homoj) is explicit, whereas here la esperantistaro/grupo is implied. I'm not sure what bearing that would have on the correctness of the respective forms though.

I will ask the Akademio about this one, as well as the example from the above thread.

Miland (Mostrar o perfil) 2 de agosto de 2015 14:39:15

sudanglo:Ni (la Esperantistaro) estas socie homogena. Each individual Esperantist isn't socially homogeneous - it's a quality of the group.
Agreed in English, but in Esperanto I might say La Esperantistaro (t.e. ni ĉiuj) estas socie homogena.

tommjames (Mostrar o perfil) 16 de outubro de 2015 11:55:25

BTW if it's still of any interest I got a response back from the Akademio regarding "ni estas socie homogena":

DEMANDO [2015.07.31]

Estimataj:

Kio estas la ĝusteco / uzindeco de la jena frazo:

"Ni estas socie homogena".

Ĉu "homogena" povas rilati al ununombra subkomprenataĵo,
ekzemple "Ni [la esperantistaro] estas socie homogena",
aŭ "Ni estas socie homogena [grupo]"?

Eblas rezoni ke, pro tio, ke homogeneco apartenas al grupo
pli ol al apartaj individuoj en grupo, ĉi tie estas semantika
tiro al ununombreco. Ĉu tio iel pravigas uzon de ununombro?

Antaŭdankon!

RESPONDO

Kara samideano,

En Esperanto la formala akordo laŭ la gramatika nombro
en via frazo estas nepra.

Eĉ en la frazoj "Ni estas multenombraj" aŭ "Ni estas multaj",
kie la multeco estas evidenta, neforigebla eco de la grupo,
oni devas nepre uzi pluralon.

Via frazo kun singularo signalus, ke io estas misa aŭ malĝusta.
Tion eblas konsideri lingva avantaĝo: almenaŭ en kuntekstoj
similaj al via frazo, Esperanto allasas malpli da risko _nerimarkite_
fari eraron ol iuj aliaj lingvoj (ekzemple, la angla).

Memkompreneble la frazoj

La esperantistaro estas socie homogena.
kaj
Ni estas socie homgena grupo.

estas gramatike tute taŭgaj.

MrMosier (Mostrar o perfil) 17 de outubro de 2015 01:52:24

Tempodivalse:The second person plural pronoun will always use the plural for adjectives and nouns describing the pronoun.

--> Vi ne plu estas geknaboj. Alvenis la tempo por igxi plenkreskuloj!

This is often helpful, because vi by default can refer to either singular or plural.
Thee says things like this to bait me, doesn't thee? Well, I'm not gonna bite. The hatred that ensues ain't worth it.

Vestitor (Mostrar o perfil) 17 de outubro de 2015 09:28:49

I guess there's not much point in asking if you think he said it because it's actually true?

However, it is true.

De volta à parte superior