Messages: 40
Language: English
Zvoc47 (User's profile) May 22, 2016, 11:05:26 PM
Vestitor (User's profile) May 22, 2016, 11:27:39 PM
NJ Esperantist (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 12:36:32 AM
erinja (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 2:47:02 AM
Kirilo81 (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 9:04:54 AM
So it is kateto anyway.
Alkanadi (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 9:26:20 AM
...it sounds similar to a vulgar word that I mustn't mention here.What does it sound like?
The suffixes -cxj- and -nj- are confined to personal names according to the Fundamento, the only notable exceptions beeing Pacxjo and Panjo (which work more like personal names than common nouns).Hmmm. So there is an exception? Can we say that Esperanto is regular if it has exceptions?
So it is kateto anyway.
There are people named Cat, but thanks for mentioning this.
NJ Esperantist (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 10:23:40 AM
erinja:I can't think of what you're referring to, but there is nothing wrong with "kacxjo". You can't worry too much over what Esperanto words sound like to people who don't speak the language, otherwise you'd have to avoid a wide variety of different words to accommodate what may sound insulting or indecent in a wide variety of languages.Okay. I'll say it. I think the OP is avoiding the sound of the word 'kaco'.
erinja (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 11:41:00 AM
Kirilo81 (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 12:18:01 PM
@Alkanadi
Yes, Esperanto has exceptions, it always had. But most cases people are used to call "exception" are just special rules:
A real exception is confined to single words, it has to be memorized with them. That the plural of sheep is sheep, not *sheeps is such a real exception. And IMHO Pacxjo/Panjo belong to this group (they were in use before the Fundamento made a part of the norm unchangable).
Special rules as "exceptions" from the general rules on the contrary are predictable from their structure. E.g. that in Esperanto a participle with -o means a person, not -as the general rule says- a general concretisation (trait/object).
Esperanto was never meant by Zamenhof to be 100% "logical", so there is no use in postulating this.
eriksangel15 (User's profile) May 23, 2016, 12:24:54 PM
erinja:I can't think of what you're referring to, but there is nothing wrong with "kacxjo". You can't worry too much over what Esperanto words sound like to people who don't speak the language, otherwise you'd have to avoid a wide variety of different words to accommodate what may sound insulting or indecent in a wide variety of languages.I know of at least two examples:
1 - In English, we have the "blah blah blah" to imitate when someone is talking, kind of like Seinfeld's "yada yada yadaa". Apparently, in Russian there is a similar word that is along the vulgar lines. Not sure exactly what the Russian equivalent is and what it translates to.
2 - In my area of Pennsylvania, we have an ice cream treat that is called "chocho" (chocolate ice cream in a Dixie cup type thing). In Puerto Rican Spanish, that has the same connotation for female anatomy that in English also has a cat related term associated to it.