Berichten: 20
Taal: English
sudanglo (Profiel tonen) 6 september 2015 11:36:07
I expect that the Chinese speakers listen to Chinese Esperanto radio and perhaps audio courses produced in China?But why should they exclusively do that, Vestitor? Can the Chinese not access You Tube, or other country's internet radio - or to check grammar and lexis the Tekstaro, and translations of European classics?
How would your argument apply to Chinese learners of English?
In any case, in the matter of pronunciation, Esperanto is far more tolerant of 'mispronunciation' than English with its 20 vowel sounds, and some tricky consonants.
But I imagine that one does not hear of English being rejected for international communication by the Chinese because it is too alien/difficult for them. If that is in fact a common attitude, then it gives Esperanto a chance to usurp English's role.
Edit: at this site you can hear individual words in Esperanto pronounced by people from different countries. Try listening to the pronunciation of 'Esperanto' (in Esperanto not in other languages).
sudanglo (Profiel tonen) 6 september 2015 11:54:20
Of course, it might be that in many contexts violenta and perfort(em)a are interchangeable.
Bruso (Profiel tonen) 6 september 2015 12:31:02
sudanglo:Can the Chinese not access You TubeAccording to this ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Websites_blocked_in_...
... the answer is, no, they cannot. And they cannot access a lot of other sites that most of the world takes for granted.
Luib (Profiel tonen) 6 september 2015 14:15:39
sudanglo:Polaris, could one not say violenta ŝtormo? Would you say perforta ŝtormo?None. A "shtormo" is already violent, there's no need to say it. I wouldn't even say "violenta/perforta vento", I'd say "ventego". It sounds better I think...
rikforto (Profiel tonen) 6 september 2015 14:27:16
Luib:TIL: Sxtormo is not a close synonym of my dialect's use of "storm".sudanglo:Polaris, could one not say violenta ŝtormo? Would you say perforta ŝtormo?None. A "shtormo" is already violent, there's no need to say it. I wouldn't even say "violenta/perforta vento", I'd say "ventego". It sounds better I think...
Vortaro:tre forta vento, ofte kun pluvo aŭ neĝo"A strong wind, often with rain or snow." In the Midwestern United States, a summer storm is really defined by thunder and lightening. We get these gentle storms where the sky rumbles and flashes and it pours but there is not much wind. Those are not storms in Esperanto!
Miland (Profiel tonen) 7 september 2015 07:28:16
Bruso:This is from Don Harlow's online Esperanto Book chapter 9:According to Don Harlow's review of Piron's La bona lingvo, it appeared in the article La Okcidenta Dialekto de Esperanto in the magazine Esperanto in 1977. Unfortunately it is not included in the online collection of Piron's articles in Esperanto, nor in the magazine's online archive. However, you could try writing to them (redakcio@revuoesperanto.org).
Don Harlow:..Piron, a former translator for the World Health Organization, offered a sample of a paragraph written in a fictitious "Chinese dialect of Esperanto," using neologisms borrowed from Chinese, to give his European readers some idea of what non-European Esperantists have to face when confronted with a flood of new Romance-based neologisms.I was wondering if this sample paragraph of the "Chinese Dialect" is available online anywhere.
jefusan (Profiel tonen) 9 september 2015 20:37:41
Mi ŝin amas. (SOV, common to Pashto, Japanese, Afrikaans)
Mi amas ŝin. (SVO, common to English, Mandarin, and Russian)
Amas mi ŝin. (VSO, common to Irish, Filipino)
etc.
Or even:
Mi estis la libron leganta. (V2 word order, as in the Germanic languages)
Then you have choices of prepositions that don't seem to be 100% settled in Esperanto, often because people bring the conventions of their own language to Esperanto.
Not to mention the whole "mi ŝatas ĝin" vs. "ĝi plaĉas al mi" thing, which feels like a power struggle to adopt what feels most natural to your language.
EDITED TO ADD: This is very common in the evolution of languages, to take aspects of another language and lay it over the structure of your first language. If enough people used Esperanto in a daily basis, this would happen naturally.
erinja (Profiel tonen) 9 september 2015 20:41:49
jefusan:Hypothetically, Esperanto's flexible word order could lead people from different countries to make different stylistic choices.This is frequently mentioned in Esperanto propaganda, that word order is a way that people can feel comfortable in Esperanto by using their preferred word order.
Maybe it is true for beginners but for experienced speakers, it is normally impossible to determine someone's linguistic origin based on their preferred word order (though preferred vocabulary may give a clue).
Good Esperanto style tends to be more or less the same wherever you go, and word order is mostly varied for stylistic purposes, to clarify something or to emphasize or de-emphasize an element of the sentence, not for reasons of linguistic background.
erinja (Profiel tonen) 9 september 2015 20:46:03
I looked up "violenta" in PIV and its definition was "senbride perforta".
"Senbrida ŝtormo" sounds pretty good to me. A violent storm is not violent because it is punching you up, it's violent because it's doing all kinds of damage as if there is no restraint on it, so "senbrida" describes it pretty well, using native Esperanto roots. It's an effective expression without resorting to direct translation from English.
Polaris (Profiel tonen) 11 september 2015 04:45:07
sudanglo:Polaris, could one not say violenta ŝtormo? Would you say perforta ŝtormo?Sorry...been away from this for a few days and just now saw these replies. Violent storm? I would go with "forta sxtormo". If that didn't really convey my thought, I might say "feroca sxtormo" or "fortega sxtormo", depending on the context. Perforta comes from the infinitive "perforti" which has a connotation of a violation or mistreatment-not really applicable to a storm, it doesn't seem. I may be wrong about "violenta"--it may have a nuance that I have yet to learn...but it seems like an unnecessary coinage to me.
Of course, it might be that in many contexts violenta and perfort(em)a are interchangeable.