Mesaĝoj: 31
Lingvo: English
pianopimp27 (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-07 23:01:31
And for that matter, what about: brila, luma, and hela
Tre dankon!
mnlg (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-07 23:13:17
pianopimp27:Could anyone describe to me the difference between: prava, ĝusta, vera, and korekta.prava = in conformity with reason, fact, truth, some standard or principle.
"vi pravas" = you are right.
ĝusta = exact, correct, precise.
vera = true.
korekta = correcting. (korekti = to correct). It is an active, and not passive, adjective.
To these you could add "justa" = fair, just.
what about: brila, luma, and helabrila = shiny.
bril/i = to shine.
luma = related to light, characterized by light, luminous.
(lumigita = illuminated, lit.)
(lum/o = light)
hela = bright.
Hope this helped. Perhaps if you have a specific context or sentence you'd like to have translated, it could help you to understand the similarities and differences between these adjectives.
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-08 00:43:19
pianopimp27:Could anyone describe to me the difference between: prava, ĝusta, vera, and korekta.What mnlg says sounds right, but they are also very interchangeable.
The way I saw it though was that Prava was from the slavic languages (e.g. Ru: Pravdo), Gxusta/Justa from latin (ius = law/right), Vera from the French and latin (Vrai, Verus = true, truth respectively) and korekta also from the latin.
Also useful to know is that the English 'very' comes from the Middle English 'verai' which too comes from the French 'vrai'.
And for that matter, what about: brila, luma, and helaAs Mnlg said, brila = shiny (glossy, brilliant etc), luma = luminated, bright (in terms of light, hela = (according to the vortaro) bright, light or clear.
Tre dankon!
mnlg (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-08 00:59:56
ceigered:What mnlg says sounds right, but they are also very interchangeable.I don't find them to be very interchangeable. They share a common affinity, this is true, but I can think of relatively few examples where I could pick any of those words and they would all fit nicely in a given context. Perhaps it's just me. If I agree with someone I would never say "vi ĝustas" or "vi veras". And if someone gives the correct answer to a question, I wouldn't say "la respondo pravas" or "la respondo veras".
Re: brila; another variation is "ekbrila", sparkling.
ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-09 14:01:43
But they all mean the same thing essentially, its just habitual use which decides which ones are more common IMHO.
But if I'm still singing the wrong tune let me know.
erinja (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-09 17:05:54
It is better to read the Esperanto definitions than to go by English translations. I know that for beginners it's hard to understand Esperanto-only definitions, and it is to be expected that beginners will make some mistakes with word choice. I certainly made plenty of those mistakes as a beginner in Esperanto, and I still make those mistakes in other languages that I speak poorly. But you will learn better if you use an Esperanto dictionary as soon as you are able. Even a beginner can check an Esperanto-only dictionary in cases of doubt, to see if you can puzzle out the difference between some words.
For the record, from the Eo-Eo lernu dictionary:
prava - diranta tion, kio estas vera, ĝusta [saying that which is true, right]
In other words, a person can be "prava" but an idea cannot be "prava". Because an idea can't say something. Pravi basically means "to have the right opinion"
ĝusta - tiel, kiel devas esti; senerara [the way that something] must be; without error]
vera - tiel, kiel estas; tia, kia estas; malfalsa; ne mensogita [how something is; the way something is; the opposite of false; not having been a lie]
korekta - this technically is an adjective form of "korekti", which means "to make correct; to eliminate errors". So korekta literally means, having to do with making corrections. However, in colloquial use, people use the word "korekta" to mean "without errors". They use it as a synonym for "ĝusta". This has been done for a loooooong time, but it's technically not correct.
mnlg (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-09 17:40:25
This is different from "being correct", "being true" and quite different from "being correcting". All these concepts belong to the same group but as I said already, I can think of very few examples which would accept either one of those words, especially in the scope of human interaction. I guess I could say that a theorem is both "ĝusta" and "vera", meaning pretty much the same, but even with that I can imagine that someone would frown.
Miland (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-09 19:44:41
pianopimp27 (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-09 23:15:02
I had read the lernu eo-eo dictionary for these words, but the discussion definitely cleared it up. Thanks again! ceigered (Montri la profilon) 2008-decembro-10 10:46:57
erinja:These words are not interchangeable at all.I see what you mean, I was thinking of the native roots of the individual words. But I still put them together in the same category in an abstract sense, but I see the necessity for choosing the right one in a specific sense, sorry for not realising that importance.
It is better to read the Esperanto definitions than to go by English translations.
I agree with Miland about the use of gxusta, it seems much more specific and formal than 'prava', 'korekta' and 'vera'.
Vera seems to be quite abstract , whereas prava is natively an adjective and has two uses, being 'saying (as you said) that which is truthful' and also simply 'right' which is more abstract.
However I didn't know about 'korekta', I just assumed it mean 'correct' like in most native languages. Would I be right in saying 'korekta' is a false friend?