본문으로
댓글 쓰기

translation of ‘benthic’

글쓴이: mkj1887, 2016년 5월 6일

글: 6

언어: English

mkj1887 (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 6일 오후 9:52:32

Neither Benson nor Wells gives a translation for 'benthic'. The Esperanto Wiktionary (Vikivortaro) does give a translation - namely, ‘bentosa’ - which I am not sure I am in agreement with. Judging from the online PIV, it seems like the translation should be simply ‘benta’. Is the Wiktionary ending ‘osa’ meant to convey something of atmosphere, as in ‘etoso’, similar in status to the suffix ‘ozo’? So, bottom line (no pun intended), what should the translation of ‘benthic’ be?

eshapard (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 6일 오후 10:35:20

Benthic means living on the sea floor, right?

How about:
maro + fundo + -a = marfunda

NJ Esperantist (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 6일 오후 11:08:50

eshapard:Benthic means living on the sea floor, right?

How about:
maro + fundo + -a = marfunda
+1 for this suggestion.
Wikipedia actually has an entry of 'benta zono' for 'benthic zone', but I much prefer having a simpler compound word synonym.

00100100 (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 7일 오후 2:41:52

eshapard:Benthic means living on the sea floor, right?

How about:
maro + fundo + -a = marfunda
From 10 minutes on wikipedia...Living on or in the bottom of body of water, either ocean or lake. So, strictly speaking, marfundo seems like it wouldn't map to freshwater biology.

So...what does marfunda mean? Can only benthic fish be described with marfunda, or can all demersal fish? If only benthic, what would you use for benthopelagic fish? If both, is it acceptable to translate the more specific with a more general term in Esperanto?

eshapard (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 8일 오전 7:52:11

Strictly speaking, neither does 'benthic' it comes from the Greek for 'deep sea'.

I don't know if there are any demersal fish that aren't benthic, but when would you need to use terminology this specialized in Esperanto?

00100100 (프로필 보기) 2016년 5월 14일 오전 4:19:33

eshapard:Strictly speaking, neither does 'benthic' it comes from the Greek for 'deep sea'.
Can't disagree with that. Apparently, the current term as used by people in the field no longer matches the literal translation. The question is what to do when the term being translated is wrong. (I mean, besides accepting bent/o).

If you want a constructed term, how about:
fundo-manĝanto (bottom-feeder)
fundo-loĝanto (bottom-dweller)
(Assuming that I'm using -anto correctly. I know you can use it with people, no idea if fish count.)

eshapard:I don't know if there are any demersal fish that aren't benthic...
Again, going by Wikipedia... Under the category of demersal fish there's benthic fish (that stick to the bottom and have negative buoyancy like flounders, stingrays, gobies) and benthopelagic fish (that hover at the bottom and have neutral buoyancy like cod and spiney dogfish). Both kinds of fish (as well as other living things) are covered by the term bentoso. (If you trust Vikipedio, that is.)

eshapard:...but when would you need to use terminology this specialized in Esperanto?
When someone pulls out 'benthic'?

다시 위로