Viestejä: 10
Kieli: English
eb.eric (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 18.42.43
The mice that performed well in the first trial were used in the second trial.
The mice, which performed well in the first trial, were used in the second trial.
The first sentence means that only the mice that performed well were used again, while the second states that all the mice were used again and happened to perform well in the first trial.
La musoj kiuj bone agis la unuan fojon ankaŭ estis uzataj la duan fojon.
I think this would be equal to the first sentence. And to convey the second you would need something like this?
La musoj bone agis la unuan fojon, kaj ili estis reuzataj la duan fojon.
mnlg (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 18.45.16
La musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.
Tiuj musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.
but your suggestion is also very practical.
eb.eric (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 18.52.21
eeee I need more sleep!
eb.eric (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 18.57.14
La musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.The second one is referring only to the mice that behaved well, but what about the first one? It seems like it could also be referring to only the well-behaving mice.
Tiuj musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.
mnlg (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 19.01.26
Perhaps it's not semantically as clear as it is in English.
eb.eric (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 19.16.29
mnlg:I am sure that there is a differenceSeems like we can use something called "ne-restrikta apozicio" to add a comment about the mice and achieve the second meaning.
Perhaps it's not semantically as clear as it is in English.
La musoj, bone kondutintaj la unuan fojon, reuziĝis la duan fojon.
I think this version is clear that we're not choosing mice based on their performance, merely commenting on it.
http://eo.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apozicio
Filu (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 19.31.20
La musoj, bonaginte la unuan fojon, reuziĝis. (Overall, they did well the first time, so they were used again.)
And like you mentioned:
Tiuj musoj, kiuj la unua fojo bone kondutis, reuziĝis. (Only the well-behaved made it to the second trial.)
eb.eric (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 19.37.11
erinja (Näytä profiilli) 16. kesäkuuta 2008 23.28.29
If you didn't want to re-word the whole thing to make sure you gave the right meaning, in writing, I think you could probably do it with commas. Commas can do a lot for meaning; remember the book "Eats shoots and leaves"?
La musoj kiuj kondutis bone reuzigxis.
La musoj, kiuj kondutis bone, reuzigxis.
In speech, I think you would add verbal emphasis to a word to give the right meaning.
Imagine these two variants:
La musoj [tiny pause] kiuj kondutis bone [tiny pause] reuzigxis.
La musoj kiuj kondutis bone reuzigxis.
Say it over in your head a few times. I think you can come up with a pattern of emphasis that will make the meaning clear.
Miland (Näytä profiilli) 17. kesäkuuta 2008 18.17.48
Here's a reference to PMEG:
http://www.bertilow.com/pmeg/skribo_elparolo/skrib...
This indicates that commas in E-o are used for much the same reason as in English, namely kie povas esti nature iom paŭzi ('where it can be natural to pause a little').
So their role is stylistic rather than grammatical, but they can still be a genuine help to the reader. Possibly, though, Asian Esperantists may them less useful, if they are not used in Asian languages.