לתוכן העניינים
להגיב

contrast of meaning in that vs. which

של eb.eric, 16 ביוני 2008

הודעות: 10

שפה: English

eb.eric (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 18:42:43

I just read a couple sentences that show the different meaning of "that" vs. "which" (indicating restricted versus unrestricted clauses) in an appendix of one of my textbooks:

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 (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 18:45:16

I think I would put it like this,

La musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.

Tiuj musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.

but your suggestion is also very practical.

eb.eric (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 18:52:21

Thanks a lot! Actually just as I had navigated away from this website I thought about the role of the word "la"... which is probably in one of the first things I learned in Esperanto....

eeee I need more sleep!

eb.eric (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 18:57:14

Actually I think I might still be confused. Are you sure there is a difference in the meaning of your sentences?
La musoj, kiuj bone kondutis, reuziĝis.

Tiuj 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.

mnlg (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 19:01:26

I am sure that there is a difference ridulo.gif
Perhaps it's not semantically as clear as it is in English.

eb.eric (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 19:16:29

mnlg:I am sure that there is a difference ridulo.gif
Perhaps it's not semantically as clear as it is in English.
Seems like we can use something called "ne-restrikta apozicio" to add a comment about the mice and achieve the second meaning.

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 (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 19:31:20

What about...?

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.)

demando.gif

eb.eric (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 19:37:11

Yes that's the construction I was trying to get at with my last post, I've now fixed the grammar mistake (I think).

erinja (הצגת פרופיל) 16 ביוני 2008, 23:28:29

This is an interesting question.

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 (הצגת פרופיל) 17 ביוני 2008, 18:17:48

I just looked at the prose sections of Nova Esperanto Krestomatio and there are lots of commas there. There are also plenty of them in my copy of Monato, though some articles have more than others. In the book Esperanto kaj mi containing articles written by Asian Esperantists there are commas on every page, though perhaps rather less frequently than in NEK.

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.

לראש הדף