Berichten: 32
Taal: English
russ (Profiel tonen) 22 januari 2009 11:33:06
RiotNrrd:"Kaj en la dumilnaŭa jaro, Obama iĝis prezidanto."ceigered:Although I am yet to see 'ux' before a vowel"Dum la antaŭa jaro, usonanoj elektis al Obama."
There ya go!
I supposed ceigered meant 'ŭ' before a vowel and following a consonant instead of a vowel...
And yeah, FreeXenon's article suffers from some linguistic misconceptions and confusion about gender and about semivowels.
ceigered (Profiel tonen) 22 januari 2009 12:09:04
russ:I stand semi corrected, so 'ux' is used before vowels, it seems I got the 'before consonants' bit right, thanks Russ and RiotNrrdRiotNrrd:"Kaj en la dumilnaŭa jaro, Obama iĝis prezidanto."ceigered:Although I am yet to see 'ux' before a vowel"Dum la antaŭa jaro, usonanoj elektis al Obama."
There ya go!
I supposed ceigered meant 'ŭ' before a vowel and following a consonant instead of a vowel...
And yeah, FreeXenon's article suffers from some linguistic misconceptions and confusion about gender and about semivowels.
FreeXenon (Profiel tonen) 22 januari 2009 15:06:45
I may pull the post and revise it quite a bit.
erinja (Profiel tonen) 22 januari 2009 16:37:44
It makes Obama into an indirect object; as if to say that voters elected [something unnamed] to him. This is why I do not support use of "al" instead of -n to show a direct object; it is easy to confuse with an indirect object, and makes the sentence sound confusing.
It should properly be "...elektis Obaman" (possible, because his name ends in a vowel, and correct), or "...elektis Obama" (treating his name as a foreign word that doesn't need the -n ending, also correct)
"Al" is not necessary, nor is "je" necessary (RiotNrrd, I know how you hate "je"!), nor any preposition at all.
It's covered here, in the PMEG:
http://bertilow.com/pmeg/gramatiko/propraj_nomoj/n...
RiotNrrd (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 07:03:46
erinja:I wouldn't really say "elektis al Obama"Hmmm... my intention was to make "Obama" into a direct object. I will take your word for it that it is an incorrect usage, and use your suggested rewordings in the future, but I need clarification.
It makes Obama into an indirect object; as if to say that voters elected [something unnamed] to him.
Since the rule is that "al" can always be used to replace the accusative case, why does using it in the way I did imply an indirect object rather than a direct one? If I say
Li batis min,
isn't that the same as saying
Li batis al mi.?
If so, how does that differ from how I used "al" in my sentence? (I'm not doubting you are right - I just want to understand what I am interpreting incorrectly).
I do dislike "je" (or, at least, overuse of it), but I also hate munging peoples names (even just by tacking an -n on the end). Not marking the name at all does make it stand out, in a way, by making it ungrammatical using any interpretation other than as a name - which I suppose is sufficient, but seems a mite clumsy. That's why I used "al" - to try to indicate explicitly that "Obama" was the direct object. The only other explicit option, if denied "al", is to become a "na-ist"!
Nobody wants that...
robinast (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 07:57:55
RiotNrrd:Oh, the accusative -n at the end of names is not that terrible thing at all.
, but I also hate munging peoples names (even just by tacking an -n on the end).
At least in case of people whose native language uses cases instead of prepositions as Esperanto and English f.e do. Look at what the Estonian language does to my name: Harril, Harrile, Harrilt, Harriga, Harrita, Harriks ... One could even say Harrikesetagi - which means "even without little Harri". I could continue of course, there are 14 cases in Estonian and several other reasons to add affixes to words, including names. 
RiotNrrd:Well, I'd have preferred affixes instead of prepositions when I started to learn English 35 years ago as those prepositions seemed so strange and unnatural... Now I do not care, of course.
The only other explicit option, if denied "al", is to become a "na-ist"!
Nobody wants that...
Amike,
Harri.
russ (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 08:32:53
RiotNrrd:Hmmm... my intention was to make "Obama" into a direct object. I will take your word for it that it is an incorrect usage, and use your suggested rewordings in the future, but I need clarification.I suspect you have confused and reversed the rule that a preposition can always be replaced by the accusative case (though in many cases, it would be unusual to do so). E.g. instead of "Mi iras al Polujo" (I'm going to Poland), you can say "Mi iras Polujon". (Such usages seem old-fashioned now, and some Esperantists are not aware that they are in fact grammatically valid.) Or "Mi eniris en la domon" can be simply "Mi eniris la domon" without the preposition.
Since the rule is that "al" can always be used to replace the accusative case
I'm not aware of any converse rule that any use of the accusative case can always be replaced by "al". Where did you read this?
If I sayNot quite. "Li batis min" is simply directly "He hit me" (without specifying what part of me he hit - he simply hit me, generally, period). "Li batis al mi" sounds a bit incomplete; I'd expect e.g. "Li batis al mi la kapon" (he hit my head), i.e. such "al mi" constructions are used to tell what part was hit, and the "al mi" is simply a different way of telling whose head was hit (like "Li batis mian kapon"), which is perhaps confusing to English speakers since English doesn't have a direct literal grammatical equivalent to "li batis al mi la kapon" ("he hit the head to me"...)
Li batis min,
isn't that the same as saying
Li batis al mi.?
russ (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 08:44:35
RiotNrrd:I also hate munging peoples names (even just by tacking an -n on the end).Yep, munging people's names is terrible. That's why I never tack 's or s onto the end of a name in English. Always say "the speech of Obama" instead of "Obama's speech"! And when speaking about the family of Obama, never call them "the Obamas", but "the family named Obama".
Oh wait, is name-munging not so bad in your native language, perhaps because you're so used to it that you don't consciously notice it...?
PS: If you have an aversion to munging names, I recommend not learning Polish! You'll see far more name-munging than adding n for the accusative in Esperanto. E.g. here are some common personal names and their accusatives: Marta, Martę; Łukasz, Łukasza; Maciek, Maćka; Jerzy, Jerzego; ... and there are 5 additional noun cases besides the nominative and accusative, with other endings!
RiotNrrd (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 16:34:25
russ:I suspect you have confused and reversed the rule that a preposition can always be replaced by the accusative caseHmmm... you may be right. I'm going to have to review my textbooks and see if I can't find where it states the rule I've been using (I'm just about to leave for work, so it'll have to wait until tonight). Now I'm wondering if it doesn't say it anywhere and my memory is just playing tricks on me.
About munging people's names by tacking on an "s": heh. You make a very valid point. I AM so used to it that I don't notice it. Why would I accept an -s and not an -n? Well... no reason, really.
Senlando (Profiel tonen) 23 januari 2009 19:04:35
I stand semi corrected, so 'ux' is used before vowels, it seems I got the 'before consonants' bit right, thanks Russ and RiotNrrdI'm not sure if I've read your last post right, but the ŭ "can" go before a consonants also, as in aŭtomobilo and eŭropa. from what I've heard the only time you can't use ŭ was at the beginning of a word. Therefore it always has to have a vowel before it.