Sfinkso:

vejktoro:To the the English speakers where I live, 'ought' is a verb, never a number. The number is 'aught' and used to name the 2000s as stated in this thread. Some people even say, 'the aughty aughts.'

'Naught' means 'nothing', but is never a numeral. I don't know what 'nought' is; this word is not used here.

I think what we are all saying, is that learners might wanna just avoid these forms altogether.

In England nought is another word for zero, also used in prose to mean nothing. Naught is an American equivalent.

Though maybe not quite as cut and dry, this you and I know, We've been around En enough. We also know how much it varies from region to region, which is why I suggest the learner may wish to avoid such things and use a more universal form.

I disagree. Nought or 'naught' is so common in English usage it should be known by anyone using English. Aught has nothing at all specifically to do with numbers, it means 'anything at all' and is the origin of one form of ought, though the two have acquired different meanings now.

Aught is equivalent to Dutch ooit meaning 'ever'.

Use of aught as a version of naught is generally regarded as an illiterate corruption of the latter word.

Hooray.
The English language forum of Lernu has finally moved on from bickering about the Esperanto language .......................to bickering about the English language

Bemused:Hooray.
The English language forum of Lernu has finally moved on from bickering about the Esperanto language .......................to bickering about the English language

Tell me about it!

Just trying to help the op.

I offered a little dialectical data to show that the lesser used forms differ greatly from region to region; suggesting that a new comer avoid such for the time being. What do I get? Grammar lessons and insulting, condescending remarks from some world boy who apparently has special knowledge of all Englishdom. My countrymen and I are illiterate!

My victory is that the superior crowd completely miss the point of the argument and unwittingly prove it. Who ain't reading right?

Funny how I can love Esperanto as much as I do yet with each interaction detest more and more the community.

Funny how I can love Esperanto as much as I do yet with each interaction detest more and more the community.

Agreed - over the past few months I've largely been coming to the same conclusion. One day I will probably decide participating here is no longer worth my time (or others' ).

However, this seems to be a problem with many Internet communities in general - the brusque vocal people tend to dominate conversations and are the most visible, although they are usually in the minority (at least on fairly well-moderated sites like Lernu).

JP Sartre was right.

Tempodivalse:JP Sartre was right.

JP was quite the lad.

Does our freedom condemn us to such foolishness? I think I'll continue to visit the Eo forums as it is one of the few places where new Eo text is generated on a daily basis.. I just gotta somehow not get too engaged in the content.

vejktoro:

Just trying to help the op.

I offered a little dialectical data to show that the lesser used forms differ greatly from region to region; suggesting that a new comer avoid such for the time being. What do I get? Grammar lessons and insulting, condescending remarks from some world boy who apparently has special knowledge of all Englishdom. My countrymen and I are illiterate!

My victory is that the superior crowd completely miss the point of the argument and unwittingly prove it. Who ain't reading right?

Funny how I can love Esperanto as much as I do yet with each interaction detest more and more the community.

What are you wittering on about? I have your private message, which I will reply to. It does you no credit though, then you misread a post and assume it is a personal attack. You're really upset because you were told something that contradicted your knowledge.

This thread WAS about English, so there was no descent into English. There really are some soft people on here, jettisoning their accounts and taking every remark as an insult.

When I wrote 'illiterate' I refer to the vernacular/dialect and regional misapprehensions of standard words originated by people in areas that had less access to education (often rural areas). Aught is used in that way in the US among some people; just like obstroculous is an illiterate rendering of obstreperous that is/was used in the North of England. My grandparents said it a lot and it didn't mean they were fools.

I very rarely go about telling people how this or that works in languages, which is not the usual case on here where every man and his dog is a self-appointed grammarian and language expert. I'm just interested in bits of etymology. Woe betide if one of these experts gets contradicted eh? The result is a tantrum.

I think I'll continue to visit the Eo forums as it is one of the few places where new Eo text is generated on a daily basis..

There is always Vikipedio - eo.wikipedia.org ... they could use some extra contributors, and there is no shortage of new texts to read - you'd learn a lot too.