I've just started with a blog in Esperanto (someone here in the lernu! forum gave a good idea - thanks!). As a complete beginner, my texts will be nothing but a pure bore initially... but I hope to get better gradually.

Would someone be so kind and correct my mistakes? Or possibly give advices to rephrase something? I copied the text from the blog here:

Timidaj testadoj de una plena komencanto en Esperanto. (Shy experiments of a complete beginner in Esperanto.)

La pasinta nokto estis plej malvarma en tio vintro ĉi tie - ni havis sep gradoj sub frosta punkto. Ĉi tio kaŭzis belegan prujnon aperi. Mi ne povis rezisti kaj faris kelkajn fotojn. Rigardu: (Last night was the coldest one here this winter - we had seven degrees
below freezing point. This causes the most beautiful hoarfrost to appear. I could not resist and made some photos. Have a look

Tio foto estas pri Juniperus sabina kiu vere estis tre belega matene. Tamen, ĝi no sole estis tiel belega: rigardu tiujn neĝberojn... (This photo is about Juniperus sabina which truly was very beautiful this morning. Nevertheless, not only it [the juniper] was so beautiful: look at these snowberries...)

... aŭ kaj ankaŭ ĉi tion prujnintan folion. Ĝi ŝajnas kiel unu tre mistika boato al mi: (or also this 'hoarfrosty' leaf. It looks like a very mystical boat to me).

Might someone be interested on the photos I talked about, the link to my blog is here

Harri

robinast:La pasinta nokto estis plej malvarma en tio vintro ĉi tie - ni havis sep gradoj sub frosta punkto.

La pasinta nokto estis plej malvarma DUM tiU vintro, ĉi tie - ni havis sep gradojN sub LA punkto DE FROSTADO.

robinast:Tio foto estas pri Juniperus sabina kiu vere estis tre belega matene. Tamen, ĝi no sole estis tiel belega: rigardu tiujn neĝberojn...

TiU foto estas pri Juniperus Sabina, kiu estis tre belega matene. Tamen, ĝi nE sole estis tiel belega: rigardu tiujn neĝberojn...

robinast:... aŭ kaj ankaŭ ĉi tion prujnintan folion.

... aŭ kaj ankaŭ ĉi tiUn prujnintan folion.

----------------

I won't claim that I've found everything, or that I'm even correct in all my corrections, but those were the few things that jumped out at me. One spelling error, one missing -n ending, and a few correlative issues. Overall, a heck of a lot better than my first blog post!

robinast:Timidaj testadoj de una plena komencanto en Esperanto.

Timidaj testadoj de plena komencanto en Esperanto.
There's no indefinite article in Esperanto. «Una» es una palabra española.

Mutusen:There's no indefinite article in Esperanto.

Oops, I missed that one. Quite correct.

I hope you are able to keep the blog up, as I think it's one of the best ways to learn the language. It's really easy to let blog posts get fewer and farther apart, until you aren't really keeping a blog anymore. I try to write at least ONE blog post per week - more if I have the time, but at least one. If I haven't written a post by Saturday, then ON Saturday I'll sit down and force myself to crank out a couple of paragraphs.

At first it can be quite a time commitment - my first blog posts took hours apiece, as I was spending so much time looking words up and figuring out how to best (and correctly) put things together grammatically, etc. After a while, as the things you work out start sticking, it takes much less time for much longer posts.

Dankon, RiotNrrd and Mutusen!

I changed the blog according to your suggestions. The missing "n" was nothing but a typo - but "tio" versus "tiu" puzzles me. I've understood that in general, "tio" stands for things (that thing) and "tiu" for persons (that person). Am I right?

Amike,
Harri.

Tiu does not stand for people and tio does not stand for things.

The difference between these is general versus specific. Tiu is for specific things. Tio is for general things.

We use 'tiu' when talking about individual people, because that's something specific. You would also use "tiu" when talking about an individual dog, book, or tree. I frequently translate "tiu" as "that one" or "that individual". If you use "that" with a noun ("that place"), you must use 'tiu'; the very fact that you have specified a noun means that you are being specific and not general, and that you must use the specific form. Therefore "that place" would be "tiu loko".

Similarly, if you want to make "that" plural, ("those"), you must use "tiuj". Why? Because if you know enough information to make something plural, then you are by default being specific and not general, and you must use the specific form, which is -u.

Note that all of this is true for all correlatives in -o and -u. Therefore, you would never say nenio kato, you must say neniu kato. You will never say ĉioj, you must say ĉiuj.

Getting more into the general versus specific thing, this has practical implications when speaking Esperanto.

If someone asks you "Kion vi legas?" [general], an appropriate answer might be "a book", "a magazine", "a newspaper", etc. The person might then follow up with "Kiu?" (Which one?) and you'd be expected to give the name of what you're reading. If someone asked "Kio?" (What?), you might understand that they didn't hear or understand you correctly and that you need to repeat your original answer.

We can also use words like "tio" to stand in for a whole phrase. If I tell you "The sky is blue", and you say "Mi ne sciis tion", then "tio" = the fact, that the sky is blue. As an alternative, you could also say "Mi ne sciis tiun fakton" (I didn't know that fact). Here I have to use the "tiu" form, because I specified a noun, "fact", and I must use the "specific" form of the correlative to pair with it.

Let's look at another example. Let's say that I tell you "Johano estas malsana" (John is sick). I can respond "Tio malfeliĉigas min" (That makes me sad; that = the fact that John is sick). OR I could respond "Tiu malfeliĉigas min" (That one makes me sad => that guy John makes me sad). Circumstances like this are ones where you can get the erroneous impression that "tiu" refers to people, when really, "tiu" only refers to specifics (and by default, to people, since people are part of the category "specific things"). But the specific thing could just as easily be a dog, a cat, a tree, or a place.

Another thing regarding use of "tre" and "eg". I wouldn't use them together, it sounds a little redundant, since their meaning is so similar. So I would call something 'tre bela' or 'belega', but not 'tre belega'. Compare it in English to saying that it's "extremely freezing" outside. You would say "extremely cold", or "freezing", but not "extremely freezing", because the word "freezing" already has the idea of extremeness in it, so it sounds a little repetitive to add this adjective. I will add that there's nothing grammatically wrong with using "tre" and -eg- together; it just isn't generally done, for the same reason that 'extremely freezing' is grammatically correct in English, but the meaning comes out repetitive.

Just a little note - I didn't read the rest of your post, so I can't say anything about the rest of the corrections offered, these were just a couple of suggestions to help you for the future.

erinja:Tiu does not stand for people and tio does not stand for things.

The difference between these is general versus specific. Tiu is for specific things. Tio is for general things.

Greatest thanks! I think your message gives me the right direction. And it also seems to hint that this is a bit confusing...

Amike,
Harri.

robinast:And it also seems to hint that this is a bit confusing...

Not much; tiu(j) determines individual(s), while tio relates to a concept, an idea, or sometimes an object. In most cases you can think of "tio" as if it was "tiu(j) afero(j)".

Tiu(j) is normally used within a given set of numerable things (tiu libro, tiuj domoj, tiu arbo), while tio is always by itself. Tiu(j) can be used by itself only when the aforementioned set is clear from the context, or when you are referring to people.

So, an abrupt "Kio estas tio?" would mean "what is that thing/object/concept?" (a request of clarification or explanation); while "Kiu estas tiu?" would mean "which/who is that item/person?" (a request of identification)

An example of the difference between ĝi, tio and tiu, that I have employed elsewhere in this forum, is:

Mi manĝas glaciaĵon, kaj mi ŝatas ĝin.
I am eating an ice-cream, and I like it. (I like the ice-cream)

Mi manĝas glaciaĵon, kaj mi ŝatas tion.
I am eating an ice-cream, and I like that. (I like eating ice-creams)

Mi manĝas ĉi tiun glaciaĵon, sed mi preferas tiun alian.
I am eating this ice-cream, but I prefer that other one.

As you see, "tio" points to a concept (the "eating-of-ice-creams") while "tiu" points to an individual, a member of a set, a numerable occurrence.

Erin, that is an EXCELLENT explanation. You ought to be a teacher!

mnlg:

robinast:And it also seems to hint that this is a bit confusing...

Not much;

Not much, yes - but quite enough to confuse me Luckily, Erinja and you have helped me to understand better. Dankon!

"That thing" stands for "tio" there and "that person" for "tiu", so I did not understand that actually, "tio" versus "tiu" means general versus specific, not literally thing versus person...

Amike,
Harri.