본문으로
댓글 쓰기

Do you use "na"?

글쓴이: rann, 2015년 9월 14일

글: 137

언어: English

Tempodivalse (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 15일 오후 4:12:32

MrMosier:
Tempodivalse:
Fenris_kcf:What many seem to ignore: Relying on the word-order for marking the roles is a graver modification to Esperanto than adding a prepoisition. I'm quite sure if one asks a native speaker of a non SVO-language (e.g. Hungarian) he/she would not adopt the word-order-solution that willingly.
Relying on SVO word order is not a "modification"; this is the way it was always done.
Careful there! Thee's starting to sound like a (gasp!) CONSERVATIVE!!!!!
What do you mean to say by this comment, specifically? I don't understand. I fail to see what this has to do with my sociopolitical views, if that's what you are suggesting.

Another way of phrasing it is - there was never a problem with SVO word order up to now; speakers of various languages already have to adapt to features in Esperanto not present in their own languages: e.g., presence of cases, definite article, and, importantly, word order, at least in order to sound "natural".

And finally, cases where neither object nor subject can take an overt accusative/nominative ending are quite rare. If at least one of those substantives is Esperanticised, then there is no need to be forced into SVO word order.

dbob (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 15일 오후 5:10:32

I can’t remember the first time I saw NA while reading something in Esperanto. What I do still remember is my own “what-the-heck-is-that” reaction. I had the same reaction when I encountered -IĈ- for the first time. Not long ago (as an absolute beginner), I wasn’t sure how to cope with those language issues, but soon enough it was clear to me there’s nothing to cope with.

NA has the look of a solution to a problem that is inexistent. The best way to find a solution is to invent a problem. I wouldn’t think too much about it. There’s NAthing to worry about.

This is probably one of the best ways how to use NA properly.

Tempodivalse (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 15일 오후 5:41:18

I should also point out that many languages with free word order have similar ambiguities, and they get along just fine. For example, in Russian, the nominative and accusative cases coincide for the neuter and inanimate masculine genders. For words of those genders, it is like not being able to put on an -o or -on ending in Esperanto: you cannot overtly differentiate the object from the subject. But this is rarely, if ever, a problem in Russian. Context will tell you what's going on 95% of the time, and other times you just revert to word order.

jkph00 (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 15일 오후 11:46:06

Vestitor:
Alkanadi:

Apple jurpersekutas Microsoft <-- who is suing who?
In this case it's probably palidromically true anyway.
I had to laugh with pleasure when I read that. Very well put, Vestitor. By the way, for those of us for whom English is not our native tongue, Vestitor inadvertently left out an "n." The word should read "palindromically."

Vestitor (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 16일 오전 12:52:33

jkph00:
Vestitor:
Alkanadi:

Apple jurpersekutas Microsoft <-- who is suing who?
In this case it's probably palidromically true anyway.
I had to laugh with pleasure when I read that. Very well put, Vestitor. By the way, for those of us for whom English is not our native tongue, Vestitor inadvertently left out an "n." The word should read "palindromically."
Thanks, I missed that. I need to employ a proofreader, I'm forever having to correct my posts.

Tempodivalse (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 16일 오전 12:53:36

I read "pallid-romically" true and tried to figure out if that was some kind of new portmanteau. ridulo.gif

There is a certain beauty in inadvertent typos ridulo.gif

erinja (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 16일 오전 12:59:34

rann:"Na" is an unofficial preposition that marks the accusative when it's not possible to add -n like , unu, iom, book titles etc. You can find more info here. Personally, I think that it's a neat addition to vocabulary that can actually used practically to clarify some sentences especially when they use the correlatives. I would certainly use it myself.

What are your thoughts on it?
Welcome to Esperanto, rann!

When you're a beginner, you will hear of a lot of reform proposals that aren't official Esperanto. You might think to yourself "This is a language that is still evolving, so I can take on these reform proposals, which are very useful improvements to the language". You might experiment with them a little. This is common for beginners! You might also run into some strong opposition to these proposals, which you have seen develop on this thread.

I encourage you to take such reforms with a grain of salt. Put them on the back burner for a bit. Learn the language well enough to use it. And then re-evaluate whether these reforms are really necessary. 99% of the time you will find that the language works great without them (hence, the reason why they haven't been adopted in the many decades of their existence, though Esperanto speakers are by and large aware of them).

I experimented with "na" as a beginner, for this same reasons (still evolving language! a useful change!) but dropped the use of these reforms for the same reasons cited by many readers of this thread. Namely, it isn't truly necessary, and the language is plenty clear without it. You will therefore find that such words as "na" are seldom used in Esperanto communities; it isn't because people aren't aware of it. It's because people are aware but have decided not to use it.

Altebrilas (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 16일 오후 3:49:41

I don't use it but I think it can be useful as part of a metalanguage to speak about esperanto. Sometimes I regret that some grammatical elements are missing, because some things would be easier to express.
For instance a "vorteto" that would avoid repetitions as in:
amikoj kaj malamikoj -> amikoj kaj malZoj
frue aux malfrue -> frue aux malZe
la bovojn iras en la bovejo -> la bovojn iras en la Zejo

where "Z" stands for the missing "vorteto".

It would be advantageous to have a space where to test this kind of elements, because I think we could discover hidden possibilities in the language, as well as some elements of natural languages, after appropriate formalization, resulted in the creation of mathematics.

Of course, it cannot be the case of a website dedicated to the learning of standard esperanto.

RiotNrrd (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 16일 오후 10:52:05

Altebrilas:... For instance a "vorteto" that would avoid repetitions as in:
amikoj kaj malamikoj -> amikoj kaj malZoj
frue aux malfrue -> frue aux malZe
la bovojn iras en la bovejo -> la bovojn iras en la Zejo

where "Z" stands for the missing "vorteto".
Ooh! I don't know about that third example, but I like the idea of a way to shorten the pattern "X kaj/aŭ malX", so I thought of an even better way.

Use the prefix "baŭ-". I snapped it off of "ambaŭ", although obviously it's entirely arbitrary. But I like the way it works out.

baŭamikoj
baŭfrue

The repetition in the third example is of a different nature; "baŭejo" doesn't work right.

Now someone needs to come up with an even better way. Then we can spend twelve pages hassling it out, continually getting more and more acrimonious as the pages proceed, until sometime around the point the Hitler references start popping up everyone will decide that every suggestion is kontraŭfundamenta anyway, and the thread will die the way it should have twelve pages earlier the end. Although there will likely be one or two people still muttering under their breath about some imagined slight endured within the thread a year from now, so the exercise will have done some good after all.

Btw, yes, baŭ does overlap with the root baŭ-, which refers to the beam of a ship. That would matter if I were serious.

This is precisely why we can't have nice things.

eshapard (프로필 보기) 2015년 9월 17일 오전 1:13:05

Ah another "Do you use {insert non-standard word here} thread".... These things can go on forever.

다시 위로