Al la enhavo
Respondi

do you use " CI " ?

de ravana, 2015-aŭgusto-08

Mesaĝoj: 96

Lingvo: English

ravana (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 19:18:36

Ci is you in singular or thou in old english . Do you use it in friendly communication ?

bryku (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 19:35:38

ravana:Ci is you in singular or thou in old english . Do you use it in friendly communication ?
No, ci is archaic and not used in modern Esperanto. But, if you insist, you are cianto or ciulo. We have some on the forum.

mbalicki (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 19:54:53

I use it with pleasure and no hesitation, but only in situations when I would also use „-ĉj-” or „-nj-” suffix.

orthohawk (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 20:01:57

ravana:Ci is you in singular or thou in old english . Do you use it in friendly communication ?
I use it strictly as 2nd person singular; no intimacy, no special friendliness. If I'm speaking to one person, even if a complete stranger, I use "ci".

I also use a version of the pronoun in English as well. (and to clarify, it was used in Middle and Early Modern English as well as Old English)

lapercaumore (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 20:46:15

Russian also uses a distinct word for the second person informal "ты" and formal "вы" (also the formal is used as a plural) Much the same way as English used to use "Thou" and "You".

KStef (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 21:14:36

Not only in Russian... In all Slavic Languages (Czech, Slovak, Ukrainian, Serbian etc.).
I think only in Polish it is archaic, but sometimes it is used (e.g. in military or films)

Altebrilas (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 21:46:02

Mi uzas ĝin foje, en medioj kie tio estas la kutimo. Sed mi ankaux scias, ke multaj esperantistoj asimilas gramatiko kun uzado, kaj taksas "ci" kiel eraro. Kun tiuj mi preferas uzi "vi".

I use it sometimes, in environments where it is the custom. But I also know that many Esperanto speakers incorporates grammar with usage, and rate "ci" as a mistake. With these, I prefer to use "vi".

Breto (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-08 23:21:51

I read somewhere (wish I could remember where) that ci was included in Esperanto to allow for the familiar/formal distinction that many languages make in the second person. That same source also said it should never be used, because the rules regarding familiar and formal situations vary wildly between cultures, so the only way to avoid offending people is to not use it at all.

That said, I probably wouldn't mind using it with God, or perhaps with pets...situations where such a misunderstanding is a moot point. Can't say for sure, though, since I don't really get to use Esperanto in my normal day-to-day.

orthohawk (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-09 02:58:51

Breto:I read somewhere (wish I could remember where) that ci was included in Esperanto to allow for the familiar/formal distinction that many languages make in the second person. That same source also said it should never be used, because the rules regarding familiar and formal situations vary wildly between cultures, so the only way to avoid offending people is to not use it at all.

That said, I probably wouldn't mind using it with God, or perhaps with pets...situations where such a misunderstanding is a moot point. Can't say for sure, though, since I don't really get to use Esperanto in my normal day-to-day.
I'd say it was included to fascilitate translations from languages that differentiate between singular and plural. the T-V distinction is secondary (many languages have a 2ps pronoun but no T-V distinction)

Matthieu (Montri la profilon) 2015-aŭgusto-09 07:02:13

No. Ci was introduced to reflect the T-V distinction while translating works from some languages, but it never was actually used. Only very few people use it and it sounds weird because I'm not sure what they're trying to express.

Reen al la supro