In English, a sentence should contain more than one word unless it is an answer to a question. However, in other languages, one word is sufficient to form a sentence. What about Esperanto?

For example, if you turned on the TV and it isn't working, can you say Malfunkcias? Do you have to say Gxi malfunkcias?

Alkanadi:In English, a sentence should contain more than one word unless it is an answer to a question. However, in other languages, one word is sufficient to form a sentence. What about Esperanto?

For example, if you turned on the TV and it isn't working, can you say Malfunkcias? Do you have to say Gxi malfunkcias?

Only with a few esperanto verbs it is allowed to omit the subject, and they relate mostly to some nature phenomena or some situations:

pluvas = it rains
neĝas
tagiĝas
evidentiĝis, ke...
estis klare, ke...

In your case you should use "ĝi malfuncias". If you say "malfunkcias" then I have no idea what you mean by that.

bryku:In your case you should use "ĝi malfuncias". If you say "malfunkcias" then I have no idea what you mean by that.

Okay. So verbs should only be on their own if they have a self evident meaning. Thanks

bryku:

Alkanadi:In English, a sentence should contain more than one word unless it is an answer to a question. However, in other languages, one word is sufficient to form a sentence. What about Esperanto?

For example, if you turned on the TV and it isn't working, can you say Malfunkcias? Do you have to say Gxi malfunkcias?

Only with a few esperanto verbs it is allowed to omit the subject, and they relate mostly to some nature phenomena or some situations:

pluvas = it rains
neĝas
tagiĝas
evidentiĝis, ke...
estis klare, ke...

In your case you should use "ĝi malfuncias". If you say "malfunkcias" then I have no idea what you mean by that.

You are undoubtly correct about the verbs related to natural phenomena, however your last two examples do have a subject: the subordinate clause.

(Subjects in bold)

Evidentiĝis la problemo.
Evidentiĝis, ke ni estas malriĉaj.

Estis klara la demando.
Estis klare, ke tio ne certas.

I also would say that "ĝi malfunkcias" requires an ouvert subject.

Common one-word sentences are:
1) Aforementioned natural phenomena: Pluvas.
2) Imperatives: Venu! Kuru! Silentu!
3) Interjections: Ve! Ho!
4) Shortened answers (as you already mentioned): Jes. Mi. Neniun. Certe. Eble.

nornen:

You are undoubtly correct about the verbs related to natural phenomena, however your last two examples do have a subject: the subordinate clause.

I am perfectly aware of that. I just didn't want to mess up in beginner's head.

For example, if you turned on the TV and it isn't working, can you say Malfunkcias? Do you have to say Gxi malfunkcias?

It might be more natural to say ĝi ne funkcias.

I am not sure that funkcii can really have an opposite - what it would mean.

sudanglo:I am not sure that funkcii can really have an opposite - what it would mean.

I don't know. This what I was thinking:

funkcias = functioning = working properly
malfunkcias = malfunctioning = not working properly

There are some examples from the tekstaro:
mi alŝultrigis mian karabenon, sed bedaŭrinde ĝi malfunkciis

You are right though, ne funkcias is way better and more popular.

Alkanadi:

sudanglo:I am not sure that funkcii can really have an opposite - what it would mean.

I don't know. This what I was thinking:

funkcias = functioning = working properly
malfunkcias = malfunctioning = not working properly

There are some examples from the tekstaro:
mi alŝultrigis mian karabenon, sed bedaŭrinde ĝi malfunkciis

You are right though, ne funkcias is way better and more popular.

I would say fusxfunkcias instead of malfunkcias.

Hi! A note about mal-/ne-.

"mal-" is not "ne-".
"mal" indicates the other pole in a commonly understood pair of dualities. So think: good/bad, high/low, generous/greedy, left/right... even "malviva" was around a while before "morta". "not good" is not necessarily "bad" is it?

Hence the confusion with something like "malfunkcii"... While we may have the word "malfunction" in English, "to work" is not really part of a duality like those other pairs are. So kreski - grow, malkreski - decrease, but funkcii - work, malfunkcii - ??

That said, there's probably some wiggle room about what constitutes a duality that you could use mal- for. You will run into people using mal- as ne- like your idea, especially on active verbs to mean "do the opposite". Like Lernu's dictionary has "malfunkciigi" but not "malfunkcii". Strange, huh?

That's my understanding anyway. Kind of a tangent!

In English, malfunction , actually means to function badly or imperfectly. So even in English it doesn't represent an opposite to 'functioning'. Still many people tend to use it to mean not working.