Till sidans innehåll
Svara

Good Esperanto?

av Alkanadi, 22 maj 2016

Meddelanden: 19

Språk: English

Kirilo81 (Visa profilen) 26 maj 2016 13:07:06

Both seem fine to me, although also I'd prefer simple.

dbob (Visa profilen) 26 maj 2016 13:41:18

Miland:on my quick look, I read: Troa drinkemo estas malsano, ne simpla morala difekto. I would use simple here.
Why would you use simple here, and not simpla?

Zamenhof (FE.38):Tio ĉi estis jam ne simpla pluvo, sed pluvego.

Alkanadi (Visa profilen) 26 maj 2016 13:44:20

Kirilo81:...especially the articles written by Anton Oberdorfer ("Peranto" ) are in impeccable Esperanto, I also like his clear pronounciation.
I wish he would allow people to distribute his work through a Ceative Commons Attribution license. He isn't getting paid for doing this and so he has nothing to lose. The benefit is that people will spread his content and give him credit for it with a backlink to his blog.

For example, I really want to share his work on Youtube. I emailed him to suggest the license idea but I never got a reply. I didn't want to bother him too much because he is doing such a good job and I don't want to annoy him.

Alkanadi (Visa profilen) 26 maj 2016 13:54:33

Kirilo81:Both seem fine to me, although also I'd prefer simple.
Is it a matter of preference or meaning? Isn't this how it works?

Simpla morala difekto = A simple and moral defect.
In this case, the defect is both moral and simple.

Simple morala difekto = It's simply explained as a moral defect.
In this case, the defect could be complicated.

dbob (Visa profilen) 26 maj 2016 15:30:27

This is how I perceive the difference between using simpla or simple in the sentence:

Troa drinkemo ne estas simpla morala difekto, sed malsano. --> drinking is not a moral defect, but a disease.
Troa drinkemo ne simple estas morala difekto, sed [ankaŭ] malsano. --> drinking is both a moral defect and a disease.

That is how I understand the original sentence. And that is why I think the author used simpla and not simple:
Troa drinkemo estas malsano, ne difekto (ĉu simpla, ĉu morala, aŭ alie).

Miland (Visa profilen) 27 maj 2016 07:13:01

I think he meant "simply" and used simpla where he should have used simple.
If you want to read a model of good style I would try Marjorie Boulton's book Faktoj kaj Fantazioj.

thyrolf (Visa profilen) 27 maj 2016 08:55:29

dbob:
Troa drinkemo ne estas simpla morala difekto, sed malsano. --> drinking is not a moral defect, but a disease.
Troa drinkemo ne estas simpla morala difekto, sed ...
--> drinking is not a simple moral defect, but ...
-->--> (meaning f.e.: not a simple moral defect, but a complex moral defect)

Troa drinkemo [ne estas simple] morala difekto, sed ...
--> drinking is not simply a moral defect, but ...
-->--> (meaning f.e.: not only a moral defect, sed something more complex)

Troa drinkemo ne estas [simple morala difekto], sed ...
--> drinking is not a simply moral defect, but ...
--> -->(meaning f.e: not only a pure moral defect but a more complex defect)

dbob (Visa profilen) 27 maj 2016 15:16:44

thyrolf:Troa drinkemo ne estas simpla morala difekto, sed ...
--> drinking is not a simple moral defect, but ...
-->--> (meaning f.e.: not a simple moral defect, but a complex moral defect)
I understand that this could mean "not a simple moral defect, but a complex moral defect". The problem is that the author has already expressed explicitly in the previous sentence that "troa drinkemo estas malsano", and then immediately says "ne simpla morala difekto". So I don't think he's talking about whether the moral defect is a simple or a complex one. What he really says is that too much drinking is a disease and not a moral defect. Reading the rest of the essay reinforces this idea. He even talks about how "ĝi estas genetike determinita malsano". There are several references clearly indicating how this behavior is in fact a disease and not a moral problem. So I think is beyond any doubt that the author is making a clear difference between the two from the very first sentence.

Here are the two possible choices:

Too much drinking is a disease, not a simple moral defect. = Troa drinkemo estas malsano, ne simpla morala difekto.
Too much drinking is a disease, not simply a moral defect. = Troa drinkemo estas malsano, ne simple morala difekto.

Now, the tricky part is what exactly he means by "not a simple moral defect". Why did the author used "simple" and not "simply"? Is it just a question of stylistic choice or is there a semantic difference between the two? And why would "simply" be a better choice than "simple"?

By the way (and a bit off topic) I found a sound file from "Faktoj kaj Fantazioj" by Marjorie Boulton, read by Luis Jorge Santos Morales; 13 minutes in good sound quality from a prized book in tre bona Esperanto.

erinja (Visa profilen) 27 maj 2016 18:17:10

There are also sound files for the first five stories of "Vere aux Fantazie" by Claude Piron, here at lernu.

http://lernu.net/biblioteko/rakontoj/vere_aux_fant...

Tillbaka till toppen