A point that sudanglo made with regard to the verb funkcii reminded me of something I was thinking about in the recent UK in Lille. When should we use ne for something often to be an opposite, if it connotes simply the absence of something? Should "poor" be neriĉa? Should "dark" be nehela? What examples would you suggest?

My two cents.

Function: Working the way it should.
Not functioning: Doesn't work at all
Malfunction: Working, but not the way it was intended to work.

A robot that washes dishes.
Battery dies, so it doesn't work at all.
Robot starts throwing dishes at the wall and breaking them.

Funkcias
Ne fukncias
Malfunkcias

"Malfunction" is probably best translated as misfunkcii, because the English "mal-" indicates some kind of wrongness.

I'm not sure what the opposite of "function" is. Malfunkcii in my mind is something like, doesn't function at all.

Miland:Should "poor" be neriĉa? Should "dark" be nehela?

"Poor" is malriĉa, surely. Neriĉa just means "not rich", which is not the same thing as "opposite of rich".

Negation is not always "opposite of", and negation is not always "absence of". For example, we have malracia, neracia, senracia. In English, the corresponding terms would be "irrational", "non-rational", and "arational", respectively. In philosophical and psychological contexts, these terms are not interchangeable.

I've noticed that when adding "mal" to an action word that doesn't have a clear opposite, and sometimes even if there is one, the result often means to reverse the state the the non-mal action would have made. For example:

- "fermi" = "to close"
This action leaves something "closed". The word for undoing this action is "open"; "malfermi" is "to open".

- "aperi" = "to appear"
This action leaves something "appeared". The word for undoing this action is "disappear"; "malaperi" is "to disappear".

- "ŝtopi" = "to plug (up)"
This action leaves something "plugged/clogged". The word for undoing this action is "unplug/unclog"; "malŝtopi" is "to unplug".

And one that I liked using in a short story I'm writing:

"stumbli" = "to stumble"

Li kuris trans la ŝtonojn, stumblis, malstumblis mallonge, sed fine tute falis. ~ He ran across the stones, stumbled, briefly found his footing (un-stumbled), but finally completely fell over.

So I wonder if "malfunkcii" could be "to un-function", in other words, to break or stop working.

EldanarLambetur:I've noticed that when adding "mal" to an action word that doesn't have a clear opposite, and sometimes even if there is one, the result often means to reverse the state the the non-mal action would have made. For example:

- "fermi" = "to close"
This action leaves something "closed". The word for undoing this action is "open"; "malfermi" is "to open".

- "aperi" = "to appear"
This action leaves something "appeared". The word for undoing this action is "disappear"; "malaperi" is "to disappear".

- "ŝtopi" = "to plug (up)"
This action leaves something "plugged/clogged". The word for undoing this action is "unplug/unclog"; "malŝtopi" is "to unplug".

And one that I liked using in a short story I'm writing:

"stumbli" = "to stumble"

Li kuris trans la ŝtonojn, stumblis, malstumblis mallonge, sed fine tute falis. ~ He ran across the stones, stumbled, briefly found his footing (un-stumbled), but finally completely fell over.

So I wonder if "malfunkcii" could be "to un-function", in other words, to break or stop working.

I dunno......"function" isn't the same class of action that "stumble" is. stumbling is usually thought of as a one-time, "istantaneous" act, kinda like touching (touching happens when skin contacts skin, no process involved, just a split-second act). Functioning is more of a process, or ongoing act, so while "malstumblis" I can see, I can't see "malfunkcii" the same way. we already have a word for "break" (rompi), afterall.

EldanarLambetur:So I wonder if "malfunkcii" could be "to un-function", in other words, to break or stop working.

I wouldn't read it that way myself as 'funkcii' doesn't create any "undoable" state, unlike those other verbs you listed. For 'malfunkcii' to mean stop working it would need to be the case that 'funkcii' means start working, but for that meaning it would be 'ekfunkcii'.

I think the only plausible meaning of 'malfunkcias' would be "doesn't work". But for this I would just say "ne funkcias".

EldanarLambetur:Li kuris trans la ŝtonojn, stumblis, malstumblis mallonge, sed fine tute falis. ~ He ran across the stones, stumbled, briefly found his footing (un-stumbled), but finally completely fell over.

malstumblis mallonge - I get it but I have to pause to think about it. Something like "momente stabiliĝis" comes across more clearly. It seems like every aspect of not functioning is covered by nefunkcii and malfunkcii is rarely if ever called for. Similar to the idea that something can be neblua but malblua is pretty much impossible to define.

Something is either blue or it is not, something either functions or it does not. There really is no opposite.

Mustelvulpo:

EldanarLambetur:Li kuris trans la ŝtonojn, stumblis, malstumblis mallonge, sed fine tute falis. ~ He ran across the stones, stumbled, briefly found his footing (un-stumbled), but finally completely fell over.

malstumblis mallonge - I get it but I have to pause to think about it. Something like "momente stabiliĝis" comes across more clearly. It seems like every aspect of not functioning is covered by nefunkcii and malfunkcii is rarely if ever called for. Similar to the idea that something can be neblua but malblua is pretty much impossible to define.

Something is either blue or it is not, something either functions or it does not. There really is no opposite.

I dunno about that. Thanks to negative images, we see the opposites of colors all the time. Arguably malblua is simply oranĝa, and likewise malruĝa would be verda and malflava would be purpura. Of course, just as we don't say malnorda for suda, there's no real reason to say malblua for oranĝa.

For funkcii, though, I agree with you. I can understand funkcii "to function". I can also understand nefunkcii "to not function", or misfunkcii "to malfunction", but malfunkcii "to unfunction" is not something I can really wrap my head around. As for nefunkcii meaning "to malfunction", I'm not aware of the predominant usage, but to me "malfunction" has always meant that something is still being done, just incorrectly. Misfunkcii seems a better translation of this concept than nefunkcii, which seems as though it could describe a perfectly functional machine that is simply not being used at the moment.

never mind.......already covered