Alkanadi:

EldanarLambetur:I also think that due to how some very common words (like fini) are used, you're more likely to hear them with implicit objects, because of that common usage that everyone is familiar with. This is not true of words like malstreĉi.

I will defiantly try to memorise these ~40 common transitive verbs and use them in accordance with how the Esperanto community is most comfortable.

However, just for the sake of argument, I can find multiple examples in the tekstaro of transitive verbs being used as intransitive verbs because of an implicit direct object. I don't think it is fair to tell someone they are wrong when it is in the tekstaro. Just my two cents. Thanks for all your help. I think I get the point now.

But as Mr. Jordan said in his book (in the full quote): but boli is always intransitive. It means “boil” in the sense of “boil and bubble.” One cannot boli anything. In Esperanto we can say La akvo bolas. = “The water is boiling.” But we need a different verb to say “I am boiling the water.”

So if "boli" is transitive and the object is implicit, what is being boiled by the water in thy sentence? In Mi finis., i'm finishing something even if I don't say what that something is. In "La akvo bolas", the water isn't boiling anything.

I can find multiple examples in the tekstaro of transitive verbs being used as intransitive verbs

I am not sure that this is a correct description of what is happening when a transitive verb is used without a direct object.

There are some verbs (though not many) that can be used in Esperanto both transitively and intransitively

1. Ĉiuj kamentuboj de la urbo fumis kaj odoris
2. Liaj kamaradoj ŝercas kaj ridegas, manĝas, fumas, kartludas kaj faras grandan bruon.

In 1. it doesn't make sense to ask what the chimneys were smoking.
In 2. it may be assumed that there was something that they were smoking (cigarettes or a pipe).

Anyway, the whole issue of whether you need to specify the object after a transitive verb is largely a matter of common sense. Whether your interlocutor will be baffled if you don't add an object, or whether the focus is elsewhere (on the act and not the object of the act).

Ĉu vi komprenas?
Kie ni manĝu?

If you just say mi malstreĉas, the other party is likely to wonder what you are unstraining.

orthohawk:
Boli is INtransitive. La soldato bolas is incorrect, unless we're talking about a soldier in a huge cauldron of water over a fire........

The reference is from the tekstaro. I think it means that the soldiers was boiled.

I made a mistake when I said boli is transitive.

Thanks for your help

It may be helpful to consider what exactly transitive and intransitive mean.

In most instances, think of transitive as an arrow pointing out, representing the flow of action, A -> B. A vidas B. A tusxas B. A is "extroverted" in a way.

Intransitive is an arrow pointing in, A<-, A blankigxas. A is not doing something to something else. It's becoming, or being acted upon itself. It's "introverted", keeping to itself.

In this way, when the object of a transitive verb is sometimes dropped, the "flow" of action is still clear: A mangxas. A vidas. These are not intransitive verbs simply because of the sentence structure. A is still acting outwards by the nature of these verbs.

This is why learning the meaning instead of a single-word translation is the best way to get a handle on this. Don't think of "malstrecxi" as "relax". Think of it as "to loosen something, to relax something." This is clearly different from the idea of "malstrecxigxi" meaning "to de-stress, become relaxed, feel more at ease". The confusion still seems to be about the dual meanings of an English word like "relax" that does cover all these meanings.

While you could, in the extreme, argue that "Mi malstreĉas" means "I am relaxing (myself)" the meaning "to loosen, relax something" is not as spot-on as "to become relaxed, de-stress" as "malstreĉiĝi." So it's not a question of grammatical possibility but of which meaning you're really after.

Also listed on that Jordan page of verbs are verbs that can be both transitive and intransitive in function. There are not nearly as many in Esperanto as in English.