Príspevky: 62
Jazyk: English
erinja (Zobraziť profil) 4. mája 2008 17:05:58
I am *not* indicating transitivity of any English verbs. I am indicating transitivity of Esperanto verbs only.
I am *not* changing the headings that are shared among all languages. I am changing no headings.
Rather, in the *translation* (the only part that anyone here is touching) I am indicating Esperanto transitivity.
Therefore the two possible situations are:
Situation 1:
User searches for the English word "take". An Esperanto definition pops up. The Esperanto definition would be marked:
preni (tr)
Situation 2:
User searches for the Esperanto word "preni". An English definition pops up. The English definition would be accompanied by the transitivity of the Esperanto verb.
I have formatted this as:
(tr) to take
*only* the "English definition" section is being edited, *not* the header word "preni" that is shared among all Esperanto dictionaries.
As an example of what I did, please search for the verb "abandoni" in the Esperanto-English dictionary. You'll see what I mean. Then, to compare formatting, search in the English-Esperanto direction for "abandon" (though that one could probably use a little more explanation of meanings, you get the idea).
erinja (Zobraziť profil) 4. mája 2008 17:19:45
I use commas between related definitions, semicolons between unrelated definitions.
For example, a word like "go" has many different meanings in colloquial speech. A very simple dictionary definition of "go" (with only a couple of possible meanings selected) might look something like:
go: to move out, to proceed; a try, an attempt [as in "have a go"]; to urinate
So my first definition has two synonyms for the form that means "iri". My second definition has two synonyms for the definition that means "provo". And my third definition has just one verb for the meaning "urini" (as in "Stop this car, I gotta go!)
It would look a little weird to see these all in a list separated by commas. to move out, to proceed, an attempt, a try, to urinate. The use of semicolons to break the definitions into categories makes the whole thing more understandable for the reader, and helps the reader understand the different categories of definitions that this word can have.
RiotNrrd (Zobraziť profil) 4. mája 2008 17:35:04
erinja:I am *not* indicating transitivity of any English verbs. I am indicating transitivity of Esperanto verbs only.Ah, I was misunderstanding which transitivities you were entering in the English translations.
I am *not* changing the headings that are shared among all languages. I am changing no headings.
Rather, in the *translation* (the only part that anyone here is touching) I am indicating Esperanto transitivity.
So, if "abandoni" has several definitions (which it doesn't, but pretend for a moment that it does), would the "(tr)" only appear once at the front of the list?
If we take "preni" again, it might look like:
preni (pren·i)
(tr) to get, to seize, to lay hold of, to pick up, to take
Is that how you are doing it? Since the transitivity of "preni" doesn't change from translation to translation, I think it wouldn't make sense to attach it to each one.
Definitely no editing of the Esperanto header. I'm only talking about the English translations here.
RiotNrrd (Zobraziť profil) 4. mája 2008 17:46:13
erinja:I use commas between related definitions, semicolons between unrelated definitions.Oops. That makes sense, but I've been "unworking" those, as I didn't understand the convention. I will stop doing that immediately (luckily, I haven't done that very often).
I think that we do need a write-up of the conventions available on the site somewhere, so we're all on the same page.
RiotNrrd (Zobraziť profil) 4. mája 2008 18:38:09
RiotNrrd (Zobraziť profil) 8. mája 2008 2:31:14
I hesitate to claim that they are complete, as they are not. I'm only entering the transitivity information for those verbs that appear in the Plena Vortaro De Esperanto Kun Suplemento. Some verbs in the Lernu list don't appear there, and therefore they get skipped.
Also, any verb that ends in "igi" I've been marking as transitive, and any verb that ends in "iĝi" I've been marking as intransitive (whether or not the verb appears in the Plena Vortaro). I think that this is a reliable rule to use, unless someone tells me otherwise.
However, the question that I've run into is: how do I determine the transitivities of compound verbs? I hit that in a major way today, as the "D" list contains a ton of verbs that start with "dis-", followed by a regular root. "Dismeti", "disdoni", etc. Do they simply always have the same transitivity as their root, or is that not a reliable rule to follow? My guess is that they do, but I didn't want to start marking things unless I was SURE.
erinja (Zobraziť profil) 8. mája 2008 13:56:23
RiotNrrd:This is a reliable rule (unless it's clear that the -ig-/-iĝ- is part of the root; I can't think of any off-hand that are like that, but I'm pretty sure you could tell the difference anyway)
Also, any verb that ends in "igi" I've been marking as transitive, and any verb that ends in "iĝi" I've been marking as intransitive (whether or not the verb appears in the Plena Vortaro). I think that this is a reliable rule to use, unless someone tells me otherwise.
However, the question that I've run into is: how do I determine the transitivities of compound verbs? I hit that in a major way today, as the "D" list contains a ton of verbs that start with "dis-", followed by a regular root. "Dismeti", "disdoni", etc. Do they simply always have the same transitivity as their root, or is that not a reliable rule to follow? My guess is that they do, but I didn't want to start marking things unless I was SURE.They may not always follow the transitivities of the root. With "dis" they probably do. If it is a word you are familiar with, you probably know the transitivity if you think it through in your mind ("disdoni gazetojn" etc). Another option is to check the reta vortaro, which sometimes talks about variants of words. The third option is to google it and see how people use it. For example, every online use of "dismeti" that I found was transitive.
"Paroli" can be both transitive and intransitive (you can "paroli la anglan" but you can't "paroli temon" - rather, you have to "paroli pri temo"). But "priparoli" is only transitive. (you can "priparoli temon" but "priparoli pri temo" sounds really redundant!)
Similarly, "iri" is intransitive, but "eniri" is transitive.
Rohan (Zobraziť profil) 10. mája 2008 20:29:11
Sadly, I don't have a paper dictionary yet; otherwise, I'd be very glad indeed to pitch in.
I have a suggestion: for verbs which necessarily govern certain idiosyncratic prepositions, could you include the prepositions as well, after the verb?
I can't remember any example of such a verb right now, but I remember having come across such verbs while reading. Maybe some such verbs will strike you immediately; if not, I'll hunt around for some examples.
Thank you.
erinja (Zobraziť profil) 11. mája 2008 3:01:03
Rohan:Sadly, I don't have a paper dictionary yet; otherwise, I'd be very glad indeed to pitch in.You don't need a paper dictionary to pitch in. Actually, I have not used my paper dictionary yet, in my dictionary work. Many of the words (especially complicated medical or scientific words) are unlikely to be found in your paper dictionary anyway, but can be easily guessed by going online and taking advantage of Esperanto's regular system of affixes.
I have a suggestion: for verbs which necessarily govern certain idiosyncratic prepositions, could you include the prepositions as well, after the verb?Yes, that sounds like a good idea. I can't think of any off-hand either, but it would be useful information to include if anyone happens to run across such a verb.
Rohan (Zobraziť profil) 17. mája 2008 22:09:22
'Kiel la estonteco de Esperanto aspektos dependas de vi kaj mi!'
Here, 'dependas de' seems to me to be a case of idiosyncratic usage of a preposition. Substituting the dictionary meanings of 'de' (of, from, by, since) gives weird stuff in English.
If the English 'depends on' is usually translated as 'dependas de', then including this 'de' with 'dependas' in the dictionary would prove helpful.
To proficient speakers and users, this 'de' might seem obvious, but I didn't find it to be so. I hope I'm not alone there...